UIBRAFLY 
OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY 

or  ILLINOIS 


NON  CIRCULATING 

CHECK  FOR  UNBOUND 
CIRCULATING  COPY 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 

Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


BULLETIN  No.  301 


THE  PLACE  OF  HOG  PRODUCTION 
IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING 

BY  H.  C.  M.  CASE  AND  ROBERT  C.  Ross 


URBANA,  ILLINOIS,  DECEMBER,  1927 


SUMMARY 

The  farm  costs  involved  in  the  production  of  over  three  million 
pounds  of  pork  in  three  different  areas  of  Illinois  are  presented  and 
analyzed  in  this  bulletin.  These  data  represent  over  two  hundred  full- 
year  records  from  more  than  fifty  different  farmers  who  cooperated 
with  the  University  in  keeping  records. 

Wide  variations  in  cost  occurred  in  the  three  areas.  In  Hancock 
county,  the  most  important  hog-producing  area  of  the  state,  the  co- 
operating farmers  averaged  a  profit  of  $1.97  a  hundredweight  over  the 
ten-year  period  1913  to  1922,  while  in  Franklin  county  a  profit  of  $1.44 
was  realized.  In  Champaign  and  Piatt  counties  the  farmers  lost  an 
average  of  58  cents  a  hundredweight  over  the  six-year  period  1920  to 
1925  because  of  unfavorable  price  conditions  during  a  part  of  that 
time. 

The  place  which  hog  production  may  fill  on  any  particular  farm 
depends,  in  large  measure  upon  the  peculiarities  of  the  farm  and  upon 
the  ability  of  the  manager  in  handling  and  marketing  hogs.  Each  year 
some  of  the  cooperators  in  each  area  produced  hogs  at  a  profit  in 
spite  of  conditions  which  proved  unfavorable  to  others.  For  in- 
stance, among  ten  farms  in  Champaign  and  Piatt  counties  the  cost  of 
production  ranged  from  $7.76  a  hundredweight  to  $13.72,  as  an  aver- 
age over  a  four-year  period. 

In  fitting  the  enterprise  into  the  general  farm  scheme  a  manager 
needs  to  consider  the  physical  character  of  the  farm,  the  grain  and 
concentrate  feeds  required  to  be  bought  or  raised,  the  advantage  of 
combining  hog  production  with  other  livestock  production,  labor  re- 
quirements thruout  the  year,  the  size  of  the  enterprise,  the  extent  to 
which  crops  may  be  fed  off,  how  the  enterprise  fits  into  the  scheme  of 
soil  maintenance,  the  time  of  year  when  the  hogs  can  be  marketed,  and 
differences  in  the  abilities  of  men  in  raising  hogs. 

The  hog  enterprise,  because  of  its  flexibility  both  as  regards  the 
numbers  which  may  be  produced  within  a  short  time  and  the  weights 
to  which  hogs  may  profitably  be  fed,  offers  to  corn-belt  farmers  one  of 
the  best  means  of  adjusting  production  to  take  advantage  of  changes 
in  the  relative  prices  of  farm  products,  especially  corn  and  hogs. 


THE  PLACE  OF  HOG  PRODUCTION 
IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING 

By  H.  C.  M.  CASE,  Associate  Chief  in  Farm  Organization 
and  Management,  and  ROBERT  C.  Ross,  Associate 

Hog  production  is  the  leading  livestock  enterprise  thruout  central 
Illinois.  Several  reasons  combine  to  give  it  an  important  place  in 
corn-belt  farming.  In  the  first  place  it  is  profitable  over  a  period  of 
years;  again,  it  fits  into  the  plan  of  operating  many  farms,  especially 
in  helping  to  market  a  large  part  of  the  corn  crop;  and  finally,  it 
affords  one  of  the  best  means  by  which  the  corn-belt  farmer  can  ad- 
just his  farm  production  to  meet  changing  market  conditions. 

Cost-of-production  studies  which  have  been  conducted  in  different 
parts  of  Illinois  since  1913  by  the  University  of  Illinois  show  that  after 
deducting  all  costs  the  production  of  hogs  has  generally  resulted  in  a 
profit.  Some  farms  have  made  much  larger  profits  than  others,  but  on 
the  average  hog  production  on  the  farms  studied  has  proved  directly 
profitable.  Direct  profits  alone  are  sufficient  to  explain  the  important 
place  which  hogs  hold  in  the  organization  of  corn-belt  farms. 

In  addition  to  being  a  "direct  profit"  enterprise,  hog  production, 
as  suggested  above,  fills  an  important  place  in  corn-belt  farming  by 
reason  of  the  fact  that  it  offers  a  way  of  marketing  much  of  the  corn 
crop.  With  most  crops  there  is  the  alternative  of  selling  them  directly 
or  in  the  form  of  livestock  and  livestock  products.  Approximately  85 
percent  of  the  total  corn  crop,  which  is  the  most  important  Illinois 
crop,  is  fed  mainly  on  the  farms  where  produced  or  in  the  immediate 
locality,  and  of  this  amount  about  half  is  fed  to  hogs. 

The  third  point  mentioned  above,  the  value  of  the  hog  enterprise 
as  a  means  of  adjusting  the  sale  of  farm  products  to  market  demand, 
is  realized  when  one  notes  the  great  fluctuations  in  the  relation  be- 
tween corn  and  hog  prices  that  occur  from  one  season  to  another.  Over 
a  period  of  years  the  average  price  of  100  pounds  of  hogs  has  been 
equivalent  to  the  average  price  of  11  to  12  bushels  of  corn.  During 
the  period  covered  by  this  study,  however,  the  ratio  of  the  price  of 
hogs  to  the  price  of  corn  has  varied  from  the  equivalent  of  7  bushels 
of  corn  to  17  bushels.  Since  hogs  can  be  increased  rapidly  in  numbers 
and  can  be  marketed  at  a  considerable  range  in  weight,  they  offer  one 
of  the  best  means  of  adjusting  farm  production  from  season  to  season 
to  an  abundant  or  short  corn  crop. 

NOTE. — The  material  presented  in  this  bulletin  is  based  upon  investigations 
initiated  by  the  Department  of  Animal  Husbandry  in  1912  and  upon  subsequent 
studies  by  the  Department  of  Farm  Organization  and  Management  after  that 
department  was  organized  in  1917.  Valuable  assistance  and  constructive  criticism 
was  given  in  the  preparation  of  Part  III  by  Dr.  W.  E.  Carroll,  Chief  in  Swine 
Production. 

147 


148  BULLETIN  No.  301  [December, 

The  extent  to  which  a  particular  farmer  will  produce  hogs  over  a 
period  of  time  should  be  decided,  however,  not  merely  on  the  basis  of 
these  three  factors  but  by  consideration  also  of  the  many  factors 
making  for  good  farm  practice. 


PART  I— COST  OF  PRODUCING  HOGS 

The  cost  studies  on  which  Parts  I  and  II  of  this  publication  are 
based  were  made  in  Hancock  and  Franklin  counties  during  the  ten 
years  1913  to  1922  and  in  Champaign  and  Piatt  counties  in  the  years 
1920  to  1925.1  Costs  are  recorded  on  the  production  of  2,257,675  pounds 
of  pork  in  Hancock  county,  299,669  pounds  in  Franklin  county,  and 
831,282  pounds  in  Champaign  and  Piatt  counties,  a  total  of  more  than 
3,000,000  pounds. 

Hancock  county  is  in  west-central  Illinois  bordering  on  the  Mis- 
sissippi river  and  is  in  the  principal  beef-cattle  and  hog-producing  sec- 
tion of  the  state.  Franklin  county  is  in  the  central  part  of  the  south- 
ern one-fifth  of  the  state,  and  is  in  an  area  of  mixed  types  of  farming 
where  pork  production  is  of  minor  importance.  Champaign  and  Piatt 
counties  are  in  the  east-central  part  of  Illinois  in  the  region  known  as 
the  grain  farming  area  of  the  state.  Here  the  corn  sales  exceed  the 
value  of  hog  sales  by  a  wide  margin. 

Despite  the  abnormal  price  conditions  which  occurred  during  the 
period  of  these  studies  and  the  high  costs  in  relation  to  sales  price  dur- 
ing the  more  recent  years,  hog  production  proved  to  be  a  profitable 
enterprise  on  typical  Illinois  farms.  This  was  true  in  areas  where  it  is 
of  minor  importance  as  well  as  where  it  is  one  of  the  major  farm  en- 
terprises. However,  there  were  wide  variations  in  cost  between  differ- 
ent areas  and  between  different  periods,  and  between  different  farms 


'In  gathering  the  facts  on  which  this  publication  is  based,  eight  to  twelve 
farmers  operating  typical  Hancock  county  farms  cooperated  with  the  University 
each  year,  keeping  detailed  records  of  the  cost  of  all  farm  products  and  the  profit 
or  loss  realized  from  each  productive  enterprise. 

A  like  number  of  records  were  secured  in  Franklin  county  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  last  year  of  the  period,  when  the  number  of  farms  decreased  to  three. 
In  Champaign  and  Piatt  counties  an  average  of  about  14  records  was  secured  for 
each  of  the  six  years. 

The  object  of  these  studies  has  been  to  determine  the  conditions  which 
make  for  more  profitable  systems  of  farming  in  different  parts  of  the  state.  The 
data  secured  are  valuable  for  this  purpose  because  they  extend  over  a  number 
of  years  and  so  fluctuations  due  to  seasonal  conditions  and  changes  in  price 
levels  are  rounded  off  and  results  given  which  represent  average  conditions.  Also, 
since  these  studies  include  a  record  of  all  parts  of  the  farm  business,  it  is  possible 
to  show  more  accurately  the  relation  of  any  single  enterprise,  such  as  hog  pro- 
duction, to  the  rest  of  the  farm  business,  as  well  as  to  show  how  the  enterprise 
may  be  conducted  more  economically.  Such  an  analysis  should  help  farmers  to 
arrange  their  business  to  meet  changing  economic  conditions. 


1927] 


THE  PLACE  OF  HOG  PRODUCTION  IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING 


149 


in  the  same  area  in  the  same  year,  as  pointed  out  in  the  following 
paragraphs. 

Costs  Vary  in  Different  Areas 

In  Hancock  county  pork  production  on  the  farms  studied  gave 
for  the  ten-year  period  an  average  direct  profit  of  $1.97  a  hundred- 
weight. For  the  same  period  in  Franklin  county,  where  pork  produc- 
tion is  a  minor  enterprise,  a  profit  of  $1.44  was  realized.  In  Cham- 
paign and  Piatt  counties  the  farmers  lost  an  average  of  58  cents  a 
hundredweight  during  the  six-year  period  1920-1925.  In  this  area 
only  the  first  three  years  of  data  coincide  with  those  from  the  other 
areas. 


Champaign- 

Piatr 
Counties 


Franklin 
County 


FIG.  1. — DISTRIBUTION  OF  HOGS  IN  ILLINOIS  AND 

AREAS  STUDIED 

The  above  map  is  based  on  average  numbers  during 
1920-1924.  Each  dot  represents  5,000  hogs. 


Thruout  the  ten-year  period  the  average  price  received  by  the 
Hancock  county  producers  exceeded  the  average  cost  of  production 
(Table  1  and  Fig.  2).  In  Franklin  county  this  was  true  during  six  of 
the  ten  years,  and  on  the  whole  the  margins  of  profit  in  years  when 
there  was  a  profit  exceeded  the  margins  of  loss  in  other  years.  These 
results  in  Franklin  county  are  good  considering  that  swine  production 
is  of  minor  importance  and  that  the  number  of  hogs  was  not  large 


150 


BULLETIN  No.  301 


[December, 


enough  to  make  possible  as  economical  production  as  on  farms  where 
the  enterprise  was  larger. 

In  Champaign  and  Piatt  counties  in  1920,  1921,  1922,  and  1925 
the  hogs  sold  at  a  profit.  During  1923  and  1924,  however,  they  failed 
to  sell  for  the  cost  of  production.  This  was  due  to  the  fact  that  during 


$16 
15 
12 
9 
6 

3 
0 

—  J<? 
-—  Co. 

Iliny  f. 
tf-  pet 

vice  f 
•  cnrf. 

cr  cw\ 

/ 

^--~~ 

"—-—-, 

^ 

/, 

s 

s 
s 

% 

V 

s 

// 

\  N. 

s  \ 

_ 

^^- 

/ 

\ 
\ 

.,—  — 

1913     19/4     1915    1916     19/7     19/6     1919     I92O    /92I    1922    /913    1924    1925 
Hancock  Counfy 


15 
IZ 
9 
6 

3 

0 

—  Je 
—  -Co 

//ing 
st  pe 

price 
r  cwf. 

oer  cm 

t. 

\^*^ 

>—  —  —— 

/ 

,'' 

\ 

s 
s 

/  ,'' 

,' 

^       \ 

^>^^  N 



-___ 

~~^~~— 

1913     1914     1915    19/6 


/9I7    1916     19/9    I92O 
Frank/ in  County 


1921    1922     1923  1924 


10 

15 
12 
9 
6 

3 
0 

—  Se 
-  —  Co. 

II  ing  t 
it  pei 

•jrke  / 
•  cwt 

ter  cwt 

s 

X\^ 

^-—  —  ' 

S«^ 

s 

^~/~ 

^^.^ 

>>< 

/ 

**^ 

/9I3    1914    1915    1916     19/7    1918     19/9    I92O   1911    /922    1923   1924    1925 
Champaign   and  Piatt  Counties 

FIG.  2. — AVERAGE  COST  AND  SELLING  PRICE  OF  HOGS  ON  FARMS 
IN  THE  THREE  AREAS  STUDIED 

In  Hancock  county  the  price  received  for  hogs  exceeded  the 
average  cost  of  production  in  each  of  the  ten  years.  In  other  words, 
hogs  returned  a  profit  to  the  producers.  In  Franklin  county  this  was 
true  for  six  out  of  ten  years,  and  in  Champaign  and  Piatt  counties 
for  four  out  of  six  years. 


the  greater  part  of  this  two-year  period  the  farm  price  of  hogs  was 
equal  to  only  about  8  bushels  of  corn.  In  1924,  owing  to  a  short 
national  crop,  corn  went  above  $1.00  a  bushel.  This  high  price  for 
corn  coupled  with  a  large  supply  of  hogs  caused  an  abnormal  spread 
between  the  price  of  hogs  and  the  cost  of  producing  them.  On  the 


1927} 


THE  PLACE  OF  HOG  PRODUCTION  IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING 


151 


cooperating  farms  hogs  sold  for  an  average  of  only  $7.49  a  hundred- 
weight, while  they  were  produced  that  year  at  an  average  cost  of 
$11.36  (Table  1). 


TABLE  1. — AVERAGE  COST  OF  PRODUCING  100  POUNDS  OF  HOGS  ON  COOPERATING 

FARMS  IN  HANCOCK  AND  FRANKLIN  COUNTIES.  ILLINOIS,  FROM  1913 

TO   1922,  IN  CHAMPAIGN  AND  PIATT  COUNTIES  FROM 

1920  TO  1925;  AND  PRICE  AT  WHICH  SOLD 


Hancock  county 

Franklin  county 

Champaign  and  Piatt 
counties 

Cost  of 
production 

•Price  of 
hogs  sold 

Cost  of 
production 

Price  of 
hogs  sold 

Cost  of 
production 

Price  of 
hogs  sold 

1913.  .  . 

*  6.12 
7.31 
6.93 
7.56 
12.64 
11.86 
15.43 
11.75 
6.08 
6.42 

S  8.48 
7.98 
7.22 
9.84 
16.08 
16.99 
15.95 
12.76 
8.49 
9.14 

S  6.98 
6.34 
8.58 
8.22 
10.07 
13.09 
15.23 
14.35 
9.69 
9.62 

$  7.87 
7.88 
6.96 
9.60 
14.76 
15.92 
15.55 
11.08 
8.29 
8.68 

$i2!  36 
8.41 
6.74 
8.71 
11.36 
10.69 

1914. 

1915  

1916  

1917.. 

1918  

1919  

1920  

$13.25 
8.48 
9.10 
7.46 
7.49 
11.93 

1921  

1922  

1923  

1924  

1925  

Wide  Variations  in  Profits  Between  Farms 

Some  farmers  are  much  more  successful  than  others  in  the  hog 
enterprise.  During  each  of  the  ten  years  for  which  records  were  se- 
cured in  Hancock  county,  half  or  more  of  the  cooperators  produced 
hogs  at  a  profit  (Fig.  3).  During  six  of  the  ten  years  some  of  them 
produced  at  a  loss. 

The  fact  that  some  men  were  consistently  more  economical  pro- 
ducers than  others  indicates  that  average  results  are  not  a  good  guide 
in  measuring  the  value  of  an  enterprise  or  a  practice  to  any  particular 
individual,  but  that  a  producer  must  regulate  the  size  of  his  farm  en- 
terprises in  accordance  with  his  ability  to  handle  them.  The  extent  to 
which  men  vary  in  their  ability  to  produce  hogs  is  well  illustrated  by 
records  from  a  number  of  individual  farms  as  shown  in  Part  II, 
pages  166  to  168. 

Variations  in  Cost  During  Different  Periods 

The  cost  of  producing  hogs  shows  wide  variation  not  only  between 
farms  but  between  different  periods  on  the  same  farm.  From  1913  to 
1916  fairly  stable  conditions  prevailed;  from  1917  to  1919  the  ab- 
normal price  conditions  resulting  from  the  World  War  greatly  in- 
creased costs;  while  from  1920  to  1922  agricultural  prices  were  de- 
pressed. 


152 


BULLETIN  No.  301 


[December, 


26 
24 
22 

•      Cost  of  hoys  per  cwt.  on  individual  form 
Average  cost  per  cwt 
Average   selling  price  per   cnt 

; 

,             , 

'6 
ft 

.4 

a 

0 

a 
t 

4 
z 

i 

^.  

»^^_>^' 

/ 

/ 

/      j 

.^.^ 

/ 

\ 

y 

/    •' 

i 

s 

-  

-^  — 

/ 

\\ 

' 

1 

L--"l 

\j 

' 

I 

i 

\  '               ' 

• 

FIG.  3. — COST  OF  PRODUCING  100  POUNDS  OF  HOGS  ON  THE 

HANCOCK  COUNTY  FARMS  STUDIED 

The  lines  showing  average  cost  of  production  and  selling  price 
are  the  same  as  in  the  upper  section  of  Fig.  2.  The  dots  are  added 
to  show  how  the  individual  farms  stood  with  respect  to  cost  of 
production.  It  will  be  noted  that  during  each  of  the  ten  years  one- 
half  or  more  of  the  cooperators  produced  hogs  at  a  profit,  and  that 
in  four  years  of  the  ten  they  all  made  a  profit. 


In  Hancock  and  Franklin  counties  the  average  cost  per  hundred- 
weight by  periods  was  as  follows: 

Hancock  Franklin 

1913-1916 $7.04  $7.65 

1917-1919 13.32  13.10 

1920-1922 8.00  1125 

Ten-year  weighted  average 9.57  11.15 

This  average  cost  for  the  entire  period  for  Franklin  county  is 
somewhat  higher  than  that  for  Hancock,  due  mainly  to  the  relatively 
larger  production  from  1917  to  1919,  when  costs  were  high.  On  the 
farms  in  Champaign  and  Piatt  counties  cooperating  in  this  study  hogs 
were  produced  at  a  cost  of  $9.18  per  hundred  pounds  during  the  six- 
year  period  from  1920  to  1925. 

Feed  Is  Largest  Item  of  Cost 

Feed  made  up  from  72  to  89  percent  of  the  total  cost  of  producing 
pork  in  the  different  years  of  the  ten-year  period  in  Hancock  county. 
During  six  of  the  ten  years  it  made  up  75  to  85  percent  of  the  total 
cost,  the  higher  and  lower  extremes  representing  abnormal  conditions. 
For  example,  with  the  rapid  advance  in  the  price  of  corn  resulting 
from  the  World  War  conditions  in  1917,  the  feed  cost  of  100  pounds  of 


1927]  THE  PLACE  OF  HOG  PRODUCTION  IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING  153 

gain  averaged  $11.13,  or  88.1  percent  of  the  total  cost.  In  1921  the 
other  extreme  was  reached  when  the  feed  cost  was  only  $4.40,  or  72.6 
percent  of  the  total  cost.  This  low  cost  in  1921  was  due  to  the  general 
break  in  prices  in  1920,  when  all  farm  products  were  abnormally  low 
(Table  2). 

For  the  entire  period  in  Hancock  county  the  costs  were  made  up 
as  follows:  feed  84.1  percent,  man  labor  5.9  percent,  horse  labor  .8 
percent,  interest  2.8  percent,  buildings  and  equipment  1.6  percent, 
overhead  2.6  percent,  and  miscellaneous  2.2  percent  (Table  3). 

In  Franklin  county  for  the  same  period  man  labor,  horse  labor, 
and  overhead  made  up  a  larger  proportion  of  the  total  cost  (Table  5). 
For  the  six-year  period  in  Champaign  and  Piatt  counties  feed  made 


How  THE  DIFFERENT  ITEMS  OF  COST  WERE  DETERMINED  : 

1.  Cost  of  Feed. — This  was  determined  for  each  month  at  farm  prices;  that 
is,  in  the  case  of  home-grown  feeds  the  cost  charged  to  the  hogs  was  the  local 
market  price  less  the  cost  of  hauling  to  market,  and  in  the  case  of  purchased  feed 
it  was  the  local  market  price  plus  the  cost  of  hauling  to  the  farm.    As  a  check  on 
the  daily  feed  record  kept  by  the  farmer,  the  feeds  on  hand  were  carefully 
measured  each  month. 

2.  Man  Labor. — The  rate  per  hour  for  all  hired  labor  was  determined  by 
dividing  the  total  labor  cost  for  the  month  by  the  hours  of  labor  performed  by 
hired  help  during  the  month.    The  labor  of  members  of  the  family  not  paid  a 
definite  wage  was  charged  at  the  average  monthly  rate  of  hired  labor  on  all  the 
cooperating  farms.    The  amount  of  labor  spent  in  caring  for  hogs  was  recorded 
daily  by  the  cooperator  and  checked  by  the  route  man  on  his  visits  to  the  farm. 

3.  Horse  Labor. — The  cost  of  horse  labor  per  hour  was  determined  by  divid- 
ing the  total  cost  of  keeping  horses  for  the  entire  year  by  the  number  of  hours 
of  horse  labor  performed  on  the  farm  during  the  year.    The  hog  enterprise  was 
then  charged  with  the  number  of  hours  devoted  to  it. 

4.  General  Farm  Expense. — There  are  always  expenses  incurred  in  the  oper- 
ation of  the  farm  that  cannot  be  charged  directly  to  any  one  farm  enterprise  but 
must  be  shared  by  all  the  productive  enterprises.    The  more  important  items  in- 
cluded here  are  taxes,  automobile  expense  incurred  in  operating  the  farm,  fencing, 
maintenance  of  the  farmstead  and  water  system,  and  such  minor  items  as  tele-' 
phone  service.  The  share  of  these  expenses  to  be  charged  to  each  productive  en- 
terprise was  determined  by  the  proportion  of  man  labor  devoted  to  the  enterprise. 
This  seems  to  be  as  accurate  and  fair  a  basis  as  any  for  making  this  division. 

5.  Interest. — This  charge  includes  interest  on  the  total  investment  in  hogs 
charged  at  the  rate  usually  paid  on  borrowed  money. 

6.  Buildings  and  Equipment. — The  annual  cost  includes  depreciation,  up- 
keep, and  interest  on  buildings,  feeders,  waterers,  and  other  miscellaneous  equip- 
ment.   Where  such  buildings  and  equipment  are  shared  with  other  livestock,  the 
amount  to  be  charged  to  hogs  is  estimated  as  accurately  as  possible. 

7.  Miscellaneous  Expenses. — These  include  such  items  as  veterinary  fees, 
medicines,  and  personal  expenses  of  the  operator  in  purchasing  and  selling  hogs. 

Death  risk  is  not  figured  as  a  cost  of  production  since  all  costs  of  producing 
hogs  that  died  are  charged  against  the  hogs  actually  produced  and  sold.   No  ex- 
cessive losses  occurred  on  the  farms  of  the  cooperators,  and  altho  there  was  con-- 
siderable  loss  on  some  farms,  the  large  amount  of  data  included  in  this  study 
over  so  long  a  period  of  time  is  believed  to  represent  fairly  normal  conditions. 


154 


BULLETIN  No.  301 


[December, 


t 

•<*•  00  IO  »  00  lO  1-1 

i  «»     r;  ** 

in  t^  -^t  «  r~  oo  •* 

t- 
o> 

ll*JI 

45 

•£  i-ri^  d 

Tj<          IN          1-I.HX 

00 
CO  O  CN  CN  CO  00  CO 

m  -H  n  *->  IN  1-1  — 

64  100 
5,742  Ibs. 

<N 

IN 

5 

«  S^-g  S 

PH    S           S* 

43 

•S    !-»->    2    fl 

t-       COCOCOtNOO 
b- 

00  m  IN  CN  •*  00  CO 

il 

us 
1 

S  S 

S  fc§  fl.3 

s  SX  s-s 

5  ft-  ga 

B 

•» 

• 

0*^88 

A 

« 

88 

•*  O  M  CO  O  •*  * 

mo>omi-"*co 

CO 

9 

£  °  °  o  ° 

Pi  o      9  • 

45 

"  ••Sis  fl 

co  »-<  co  rH  ec  1-1  co 
os  oo  >n  o  IN  •->  --I 

•«»•  O  (N  I-H  <N  1-1  CO 

56  100 
98,455  Ibs. 

ti 
o> 

«  g  o  -g  o 
P-i  S    2  o 

^KO"|  a 

o     cocom^cN 
•-i                    t» 

ScDOJ'H'Ht-O 
O  •-!  <N  CO  CN  •<»• 

2  1 

00 

S 
oo  (>: 

0  S 

3&s|l 

^ 

r- 
o» 

Q  &^  o  S 
a 

«                            ^ 

o  °* 

• 

I**     *3.*> 

SO  •->  1-1  CO  «D  CM  00 

T 

(N  t^  O  t~  CO  <N  CO 

<e 
at 

£§°°8 

•  fefilJ 

«O  1-1  CO  r-i  N  r-1  CO 

00 

to  oo  -"  I-H  oo  05  c 

•*  O  <N  rt  i-i  O  00 

8  J 

00 

co 
co    TiT 

C35     t- 

g 

O) 

S3  g'S-g  o 

PH  S       2  ° 

«*-2'§S 

CO       INi-"INtNTji 
00 

co  oo  •*  o  -H  co  co 

t-  O  CN  CN  CO  CN  OJ 

.75  100 
55,980  Ibs. 

°  8°  §"3 

oft-  g  a 

at 

* 

S 

o  «o  §3 
Oa^oS 
a 

ai 

M 

^H        N 

S 

I  *»       •-!+» 

1-1  C«  CD  T)<  IN  OS  !O 

-H  CO  OS  i-«O  CO  't 

•^ 

at 

»  §  o  -g  o 

PH  S       2  0 

M  hOl?   S 

b»  1-1  IN  1-1  Tf  IN  O 

00 

<N  (32  O>  O  1-1  1-1  OS 

m  o  •-!  1-1  co  CM  oo 

SB 
^  S 

m 
t^ 
t^ 

CO     CO 

9 

a 

»  g  0  ^  0 
PH  S      2  o 

m 

.-.          -73  ^, 
»  t-o  a  fl 

T)!        r*r+r*mt, 
00 

So  o>  eo  m  •-"  oo 
O  CM  I-H  CN  «3  ij< 

.43  100 
89,370  Ibs. 

o  $o  S-g 

Oo.-Hga 

a 

IO 

• 

si  ~ 

o  So  §'  3 
O  a^  o  S 
P. 

CO 

*» 

JO     CN 

8 

1  *>    "S  -** 

(N  00  IO  CO  00  1-1  O 

in  t-  co  oj  i"  01 

w 
o 

sg-sls 

—  c     3  .« 

•**  t-m'°  d 

t»       TJ<       i»<       CM 
00 

TJI  in  oo  Tf  d  1-1  1-1 

2  100 
4,464  Ibs. 

oo 

a 

I§^J8 

**"  t-o'S  fl 

TJ<       CO       1-1       00 
00 

CO  C5  CO  i-  '  CO  O  ^ 
lO  O  1  1-1  1-1  1-1  ^" 

8  J 

"O 

3 
co    •"! 

00     (N 

S  So  fl-3 

Oa^oS 
a 

^ 

•x> 
• 

c3a2§a 

o, 

• 

0» 

! 

"5 
t-l 

niini 

•d 

Items  of  cost 

.    .    .  d    •    •    • 

:::§::: 

•a 

,      § 

.     .     .  .3     .     .     . 

«    § 

•    •    •  o    •    •    • 

fc  -3 

•    •«)••• 

.5  -2 

JS  |S  il 

0^3     .  tD-O  d 

•i-^ts^g^ 
«  2  PI  l-o 

jUUBfiU 

Total  c 
Total  pork  pr< 

:  :  :1  :! 

uS  :-  :S 

|3«lll 

•—  0  g^j3"o 

SSfesSS-g 

<3  o  *•  3  >•"  0) 

S«£p3o2fe 

Total  C 
Total  pork  prc 

0 

H 

a 


p 

o 
O 

M 

o 
o 
p 


3 

!8 


5 

o 

S 


P 
o 

PH 


V 

t 

d 

I 


1927] 


THE  PLACE  OF  HOG  PRODUCTION  IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING 


155 


TABLE  3. — COST  OF  PRODUCING  100  POUNDS  OF  HOGS  IN  HANCOCK 
COUNTY:  BY  PERIODS,  1913-1922 


1913-1916 

1917-1919 

1920-1922 

1913-1922 

Items  of  cost 

Cost         Per- 
per           cent 
100            of 
pounds      total 
gain         cost 

Cost         Per- 
per          cent 
100            of 
pounds      total 
gain          cost 

Cost         Per- 
per          cent 
100            of 
pounds      total 
gain          cost 

Cost         Per- 
per          cent 
100            of 
pounds      total 
gain         cost 

Man  labor  

$  .48           6.8 

S   .58           4.4 

$  .62           7.7 

$  .56           5.9 

Horse  labor  

.08           1.1 

.09             .7 

.06             .8 

.08             .8 

Interest  

.23           3.3 

.35           2.6 

.21           2.6 

.27           2.8 

Buildings  and  equipment 
Overhead  

.09           1.3 
.25          3.5 

.13           1.0 
.21           1.6 

.21           2.7 
.29           3.6 

.15           1.6 
.25           2.6 

Miscellaneous  

.11           1.5 

.26           2.0 

.24           3.0 

.21           2.2 

Feed  

5.82         82.5 

11.69         87.7 

6.37         79.6 

8.06        84.1 

Total  cost  

$7.06       100. 

$13.31       100. 

$8.00       100. 

$9.58       100. 

Total  pork  produced.  .  .  . 

673,075  Ibs. 

787,267  Ibs. 

797,333  Ibs. 

2,257,675  Ibs. 

up  only  76.2  percent  of  the  total  cost  (Table  6).  This  is  accounted 
for  by  the  lower  price  of  feeds  during  most  of  the  period. 

Since  there  was  so  much  variation  during  the  ten-year  period  in 
the  cost  of  producing  pork — from  $6.12  a  hundredweight  in  1913  to 
$15.43  in  1918  in  Hancock  county,  and  a  like  variation  in  Franklin 
county — it  is  noteworthy  that  the  proportion  of  total  cost  made  up  by 
feed  did  not  vary  more  widely  (Tables  2  and  4) . 

The  gradual  rise  in  the  cost  of  man  labor  during  the  war  period 
and  the  continued  high  level  during  1919,  1920,  and  1921  is  reflected 
in  these  data.  During  these  three  years  man  labor  cost  64,  73,  and  64 
cents  respectively  in  producing  100  pounds  of  pork,  while  it  averaged 
only  48  cents  during  the  first  four  years  of  the  study. 

Horse-labor  costs  and  interest  charges  were  high  from  1917  to 
1919.  Horse-labor  costs  are  made  up  in  large  part  of  the  cost  of  feed; 
hence  the  highest  costs  occurred  at  those  periods  when  feeds  were 
highest.  The  interest  cost  is  of  course  directly  proportional  to  the 
price  of  hogs. 

Building  and  equipment  costs  rose  gradually  during  the  ten-year 
period,  reaching  their  highest  point  in  1922.  This  is  explained  by  the 
continued  high  prices  of  building  materials,  and  the  fact  that  farmers 
made  few  repairs  during  the  war  period  and  so  tended  to  increase  their 
expenditures  in  the  following  years. 

The  above  data  indicate  how  changes  in  general  price  conditions 
affect  the  cost  of  producing  hogs.  Since,  however,  feed  makes  up  such 
a  large  proportion  of  the  total  cost,  any  change  in  prices  at  that  point 
is  much  more  quickly  reflected  in  the  cost  than  are  changes  in  other 
items. 


156 


BULLETIN  No.  301 


[December, 


00  O>  CO  t-  N  O  00 

. 

•-H  o»  oo  10  oo  o  a> 

t- 

2 

IS"8!  5 

1C       CN       CO       CO 
00 

SO)  CO  Is-  CO  ••*  CO 
OCNOCOOt- 

.07  100 
6,379  Ibs. 

H 

CN 

0 

,s  S"®!™ 

PH  o      &9 

M    "    <WNJ; 

CD  00  1*-  CO  t*  O  >"H 
i-H  O  CN  O  CO  CN  10 

§| 

00 

8  »- 

3»s|a 

. 

0     ^r 

ft 

S^ 

•a* 

l*»  O  ^*  Oi  C$  00  ^ 

, 

<-"  1-1  oo  as  a>  CN  o 

CO 

•H 
O 

p,8°°8 

0-HIN       CO       0 

I-H                                     00 

t~  •*  O  00  CD  t-  O 

00—  ICNOCNOCO 

22  100 
32,355  Ibs. 

CN 

a> 

. 

COCNrH        TCCNU5 

t»  O  !>•  S>  t~  CN  t- 

CN  IN  .-i  O  •<>•  <N  IN 

2  J 

§    oo" 

a 

CO 

00 

6a-|a 

•»                            *" 

S 

i,  *"      "3  — 

T  /   ~.  r   _         ' 

COOOOOOCOOiO 

OS 

OOCNi-H         M1         iH 
00 

CN  •*  t*.  00  •*  iO  00 

l^-  CN  «-H  O  CO  O  C3 

58  100 
17,355  Ibs. 

1 

u  o'o'n  o 
PH  S      2  ° 

1O  -H  1O  Tjl  rH  CO  CD 

C>  I-H  <N  --H  CO  O  CN 

S 

10  is 

a 

CO 

8 

a 

- 

2 

i*"      "3*" 

1*-  ^  00  CO  CN  t*  O> 

^t--HCO«50t- 

at 

IO  CO  CN  •-!  TJ<  CN  O5 
CD  CN  00  C5  t^-  1^-  O 

o    ^ 

10 
00 

iS 

m     CO 

2 

«  g'o-g  o 

PH  o      5  ° 

>O       CN       CO       »^ 
00 

t~  ^H  CN  10  CO  IN  CO 

00  1-1  CO  O  "O  O  CO 

§. 

-  £ 

W 

CO      *O 

.     IN 

ft 

1C 

CO 

a 

- 

s 

i  *>    "^  *» 

•*  CO  00  •->  O  O  -" 

•^  t*-  O}  *O  ^*  iO  CD 

CO 

«  g'S-g  o 

PH  S      3  ° 
M  "§'§  B 

00 
t^OOOOOCN     -CO 

98  100 
9,777  Ibs. 

00 

2 

PH  §      5  ° 

CO       CN       COi-H-* 
00 

00  <-<  CO  O  •*  IN  O 

.09  100 
7,665  Ibs. 

a 

"5 

S 

ft 

3 

Items  of  co 

.  .  .  a  .  .  . 

Li 

•d 

O 

"o 

i 

i 

:::-«::: 

•o 

:  :  :  &  :  :  : 

• 

o 

*i      3 

:  :  :  o-  :  :  : 

-    1 

•°,2  »i   M  03_C3 

g     "g 

1- 
O       (-• 

1 

O 

H 

J|  :«j| 

iililii 

Total  co 
Total  pork  pro< 

S 

C2 
*^ 

e& 

^H 

O 


sS 

h 

a 


D 

O 

O 
g 
3 
a 


o 
o 
S 


p 

S 


o 

g 

I 

a 

i 

=H 


D 

f 


a 
3 

a 

H 


1927] 


THE  PLACE  OF  HOG  PRODUCTION  IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING 


157 


10  <N  •*  ID  (^  00  00 

i 

CO 

2 

PH  u       2  ° 

"^e*      W      00   8      ai 

^  £ 

tO_ 

(N 

O, 

05 

CO 

i—  i 

COOWW-*IN 

'ERIODS,  1< 

1920-1922 

£§°f  § 

o> 
to  fc'O'a  fl 

,,a8,,g  ]  | 

I-M 
IH 

- 

-H                                          00     ri 

g 

01->0"5TH®CO 

O 

O 

fc 
3 

2 

o> 

2 

*!*!! 

to     N     co     to  o 
00   O     m 

to 

U5 
00  O  Cl  tO  ^  00  O5    t^     ^ 
t*-  »—  t  CO  O  MI  O  *—  '    O^     tO 

g 

3«ap 

1-1    IN 

03 
O 

o 

OT|i>OOi-iOO 

a 

o 

00 

P 

to 

o> 

co 

2 

.pi's  •gi 

P-i  u      3  ° 

"m    fcl  O    rt    ^ 

00  «  IN  i-l  •*  ^H  i-(    o 

00    O 

^     5 
IN 
t- 

O 

1-1  OS  O>  00  1-1  00  O>    "3     g 

O 
PH 

8 

a 

*»          *  u 

OF  PRODUCING  1 

H 

Items  of  cost 

iiiiiii  , 

iHlniij 

ji  ;|;|  al 

^J"§  J  S^  §       fn      O 
C  £  fe2  j;  073            ^ 

158 


BULLETIN  No.  301 


[December, 


1 

s 
O 


0 

2 
fi 


3 

I 


,  «   -^ 

CO  O  O  CO  00  i-l  C4 

1920-1925 

o,8°28 

t>. 

§1 

CN 

CO 
CN 

00        !-<" 

1  2 

c3a-|S 

•*                            " 

i1 

—  •-.''--•-   r 

IP 

CM 

2 

«  g^-g  o 

—  ;       °  o 

CO       CN-^.-CO 

IO  CO  •<«•  O  CO  CO  CO 
CO  O  CM  CN  ^"  1-1  OS 

00 

8  8  §  §'3 
0S-|S 

CO 

o  i 

•  «    -^ 

Tf  O  O  t-  OS  00  CO 

1 

• 

CO  (N  OS  i-H  t>.  —  O 
OS  1-1  CN  CO  CO  CO  t- 

§1 

CD        . 
CO     (N 

!&§|1 

00 

'/.- 

1     *>          ~  *S 

N^^,in^^,<0 

w 

CN 

OS 

fSol-a 

00  1-1  IN  CS  •*  N  10 

2  1 

i 

CO 

uS.2gg> 
a 

•» 

8  " 

i  «a    — 

OS  CO  IN  O  00  CO  <N 

CN 

OS 

£H§ 

§OS  OO  O  CO  *—  '  O 
O  CN  (N  •*  CO  00 

74  100 
34,854  Ibs. 

<3e-|S 

•* 

•• 

1     «3          — 

•a  •-!  co  ^f  >o  oo  •>}< 

OS 

.«  o  "o  -g  o 

—  -3      £  o 

g  £g  C.9 

1-1  CN  CO  T»"  O  CO  — 

1-1                          I-H          CD 

l^"  00  00  Is*  00  1*»  CO 
OS  -<  CN  CO  00  "5  1-1 

2    £ 
"5 
OS 

^  s 

o^|S 

1O 

X 

TJ<  00  CO  CN  CN  1/5  CO 

1 

OS 

Pu  §    2  ° 

1-1  -H  CO  *J<  CO  l-H  IO 

2| 

>o 

g  § 

™     10 

jal|a 

^                        OS 

CN     ro 
*» 

1 

jiiji  :j 

•d 

"o 

:  :  .-g  .  :  : 

i 

s  -3 

M 

.    .    .-o     .  aa 

.    .     .   —     .7 

sl  ;S  :§ 

O  ,O      .    CD  "O    fl 

sllllll 

Total  c 
Total  pork  pr< 

1927]  THE  PLACE  OF  Hoc  PRODUCTION  IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING  159 

PART  II— FACTORS  TO  CONSIDER  IN  FITTING  THE  HOG 
ENTERPRISE  TO  THE  INDIVIDUAL  FARM 

The  planning  of  a  successful  system  of  farming  requires  the  fitting 
together  of  a  number  of  different  enterprises  in  a  way  which  will  insure 
economical  production  from  the  entire*  farm.  It  is  largely  an  indi- 
vidual matter,  for  it  must  take  into  account  the  peculiarities  of  the 
farm  and  of  the  manager  himself.  Careful  attention  must  be  given  to 
the  best  utilization  of  the  land  and  the  crops  produced,  the  available 
labor  and  equipment,  the  outlay  required,  the  efficiency  of  operation, 
and  the  relation  of  each  part  to  the  entire  farm  unit. 

The  place  which  hog  production  may  be  made  to  fill  on  any  given 
farm  may  be  said  to  depend  upon  the  following  factors: 

(1)  The  physical  character  of  the  farm,  (2)  the  grain  and  con- 
centrate feeds  required  to  be  bought  or  raised,  (3)  the  advantage  of 
combining  hog  production  with  other  livestock  production,  (4)  labor 
requirements  thruout  the  year,  (5)  the  size  of  the  enterprise,  (6)  the 
extent  to  which  crops  may  be  fed  off,  (7)  how  the  enterprise  fits  into 
the  scheme  of  soil  maintenance,  (8)  the  time  of  year  when  the  hogs 
can  be  marketed,  and  (9)  the  manager's  own  ability  in  raising  hogs. 

How  the  changing  relation  between  the  price  of  corn  and  the  price 
of  hogs  may  affect  the  practices  of  handling  hogs  and  the  sale  of  hogs 
and  corn  on  the  same  farm  from  year  to  year  is  discussed  later  (in 
Part  III).  In  this  section  the  discussion  will  be  confined  to  the  points 
mentioned  in  the  above  paragraph. 

Physical  Character  of  the  Farm 

Farms  in  the  same  community  vary  greatly  in  their  natural  fertil- 
ity and  in  the  proportion  of  the  land  which  is  tillable.  The  need  of 
maintaining  or  of  improving  the  fertility  of  the  land  may  call  for  the 
growing  of  certain  crops,  especially  legumes.  Again,  some  of  the  land 
may  be  untillable  and  suited  only  for  permanent  pasture.  Either  of 
these  conditions  will  provide  a  large  proportion  of  rough  feeds.  In 
planning  a  system  of  farming,  unless  one  expects  to  purchase  feed,  the 
crops  raised  will  largely  determine  the  kinds  of  livestock  to  be  kept. 

Hogs  Require  Large  Amounts  of  Grain  and  Concentrates 

As  we  have  already  seen,  feed  normally  makes  up  about  80  per- 
cent of  the  total  cost  of  producing  pork  where  hogs  are  produced  in 
large  numbers.  Altho  forage  crops  have  been  used  in  increasing 
amounts  in  recent  years,  they  make  up  but  a  small  part  of  the  total 
feed  cost,  for  hogs  consume  large  amounts  of  grain  and  other  concen- 
trated feeds  compared  with  the  amount  of  forage  they  utilize.  In  these 
studies  over  460  pounds  of  feeds  exclusive  of  pasture  were  required 
for  each  100  pounds  gain  in  weight.  The  amount  of  pasture  and  other 


160 


BULLETIN  No.  301 


[December, 


roughage  used  would  be  equivalent  to  not  more  than  150  pounds  on 
the  dry-roughage  basis,  or  to  about  one-fourth  of  the  total  weight  of 
feed.  Moreover,  the  roughage  used  by  hogs  must  be  mainly  of  the 
succulent  and  more  valuable  kinds. 

The  economic  place  of  the  swine  enterprise  in  the  farming  system 
often  depends,  therefore,  on  whether  the  surplus  roughage  feeds  can 
be  economically  sold  or  turned  back  to  the  soil.  Since  good  cropping 
systems  in  the  corn  belt  produce  from  one  to  two  times  as  much 
roughage  (including  hay,  straw,  and  corn  stover)  as  grain  by  weight, 
the  economical  utilization  of  legume  crops  and  the  by-products  of 
grain  production  are  of  vital  importance  to  the  profitable  operation  of 
most  farms.  In  the  utilization  of  such  roughages  hogs  cannot  be  con- 
sidered to  have  an  important  place  except  as  they  fit  in  with  the 
production  of  other  livestock.  It  may  well  be  observed,  however,  that 
in  so  far  as  hogs  can  utilize  forage  crops  they  can  make  the  best  use  of 
legumes.  They  therefore  provide  a  direct  income  from  the  legumes 
which  are  needed  in  a  good  system  of  soil  improvement. 

In  the  areas  represented  by  these  studies  quite  a  difference  exists 
in  the  amounts  and  kinds  of  feeds  used  in  growing  hogs  (Table  7). 


TABLE  7. — KINDS  AND  AMOUNTS  OF  FEED  CONSUMED  BY  HOGS  FOR  100 

POUNDS   GAIN:    HANCOCK   AND   FRANKLIN   COUNTIES, 

1913-1922;  CHAMPAIGN  AND  PIATT  COUNTIES, 

1920-1925 


Kind  of  feed 

Hancock  county 
10-year  average 

Franklin  county 
10-year  average 

Champaign  and  Piatt 
counties 
6-year  average 

Corn.  .  .            .            ... 

Ibs. 
424  .1  (7.57  bu.) 

Ibs. 
372  .9  (6  67  bu  ) 

Ibs. 
437.6  (7  81  bu) 

Other  grain  

34.7 

12.9 

29.9 

Mill  feed  

4.1 

59.7 

3.9 

Protein  supplements  

18.4 

14.2 

31.8 

Total  concentrates  

481.3 

459.7 

503.2 

Roughage  

3.5 

4.8 

6.4 

Total  feed  (except  pasture)  . 
Value  of  pasture  

484.8 
$       .32 

464.5 
$        .24 

509.6 
$        .73 

Pasture  days1  

3.88 

6.10 

7.68 

Total  pork  produced  

2,257,675  Ibs. 

299,669  Ibs. 

831,282  Ibs. 

'The  term  pasture  day,  as  used  here,  indicates  the  amount  of  pasture  which  a  mature  cow  or 
horse  would  consume  in  a  day  when  receiving  no  other  feed.  The  equivalent  in  hogs  is  equal  to  1,800  to 
3,000  pounds  live  weight,  depending  on  the  age  of  the  hogs  and  the  amounts  of  concentrates  being  fed. 

In  Hancock  county  corn  is  a  major  crop  and  hogs  are  fed  out  to  good 
average  weights.  In  Franklin  county  less  corn  and  more  wheat  are 
produced,  with  the  result  that  less  corn  and  more  mill  feeds  are  fed. 
Hogs  are  sold  at  lighter  weights,  and  so  less  concentrates  are  used. 
Also,  the  hog  enterprise  is  small  on  most  of  the  farms  in  Franklin 
county  and  waste  feeds  on  which  no  records  could  be  secured  made 
up  a  larger  part  of  the  ration.  In  Champaign  and  Piatt  counties  the 
hogs  were  not  handled  so  efficiently  as  on  many  farms  in  Hancock 


1927] 


THE  PLACE  OF  HOG  PRODUCTION  IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING 


161 


county,  where  large  numbers  were  produced.  This  in  part  accounts 
for  the  use  of  more  feed  for  100  pounds  gain  in  these  two  counties. 
It  is  apparent  that  horse,  beef,1  dairy,  or  mutton  production  has 
a  distinct  advantage  over  hog  production  in  the  use  of  pasture  and 
roughage.  In  those  enterprises  pasture  and  roughage  make  up  a  large 
proportion  of  the  feed  and  at  some  seasons  roughage  may  be  fed  ex- 
clusively. Also,  the  roughages  used  include  kinds  which  hogs  cannot 
utilize  to  advantage. 

Hog  Production  Supplements  Other  Livestock 

On  many  farms  hog  production  fits  in  advantageously  with  either 
beef  or  dairy  production.  In  beef  production  hogs  utilize  the  by- 
products of  the  feed  lot.  In  dairy  production,  where  the  butterfat  is 


eoo 


600 


labor  on  entire  farm 
Man  labor  on  hogs 


Jon.   fet>.  Mar.   Apr.   May  June  July  Au<j.  Sept.   Oct.    Nov.   Dec. 

FIG.  4. — MAN  LABOR  REQUIRED  FOR  THE  HOG  ENTERPRISE  ON  A  320-AcRE  FARM  AND 

TOTAL  MAN  LABOR  USED  ON  THE  FARM 

The  above  graph  is  based  on  ten  years  of  records  (1913-1922)  from  a  farm 
raising  both  spring  and  fall  pigs.  Under  these  conditions  the  labor  on  hogs  is 
quite  evenly  distributed  thruout  the  year  and  makes  up  but  a  small  part  of  the 
total  farm  labor. 


sold,  the  by-product,  skim  milk,  can  be  used  to  take  the  place  of 
more  expensive  nitrogenous  feeds. 

Labor  on  Hogs  Evenly  Distributed  Over  the  Year 

Except  for  the  farrowing  period,  which  may  come  during  periods 
of  slack  labor  demands,  the  labor  on  hogs  is  quite  evenly  distributed 
thruout  the  year.  This  is  especially  true  where  both  spring  and 

'See  Bulletin  261  of  this  Station,  "Cattle  Feeding  in  Relation  to  Farm  Man- 
agement," pages  231  to  237. 


162 


BULLETIN  No.  301 


[December, 


fall  pigs  are  produced.  The  labor  distribution  on  one  of  the  farms  in 
this  study  which  regularly  produced  both  spring  and  fall  pigs  thruout 
the  year  is  typical  of  farms  operating  on  this  basis  (Fig.  4). 

In  contrast,  the  labor  used  in  crop  production  or  in  feeding  cattle 
and  sheep  is  concentrated  at  certain  periods  of  the  year.  Cattle  and 
sheep  fed  in  winter  may  be  said  to  market  labor  to  better  advantage 
than  hogs  because  there  is  not  much  use  for  the  available  labor  at 
that  time.  The  labor  required  for  hog  production  may  be  reduced 
somewhat  during  the  summer  if  the  hogs  are  allowed  to  make  full  use 
of  forage  crops.  Also,  the  costs  can  be  reduced  considerably  thru  the 
use  of  self-feeders,  watering  systems,  and  by  other  good  practices. 

Large  Numbers  Reduce  Cost 

Farms  producing  large  numbers  of  hogs  have  an  advantage  over 
those  whose  swine  enterprise  is  small.  This  applies  especially  to  the 
amount  of  labor  required  and  the  annual  charge  for  use  of  equipment. 

TABLE  8. — How  SOME  OF  THE  COSTS  OF  PORK  PRODUCTION  ARE  AFFECTED 
BY  SIZE  OF  ENTERPRISE:  HANCOCK  COUNTY,  1913-1922 


Amount  of  pork 
produced  annually 

Number 
of 
records 

Costs  for  100  pounds  of  pork  produced 

Man 
hours 

Horse 
hours 

Buildings 
and 
equipment 

Miscel- 
laneous 

Under  15,000  pounds  

13 
29 
20 
20 

3.91 
2.50 

2.57 
2.03 

.659 
.614 
.501 
.454 

$.257 
.159 
.136 
.135 

$.244 
.209 
.248 
.180 

15,000  to  25,000  pounds  

25,000  to  35,000  pounds  

Over  35,000  pounds    

In  Hancock  county  it  was  found  that  on  farms  producing  less 
than  15,000  pounds  of  pork  approximately  4  hours  of  man  labor  and 
%  hour  of  horse  labor  were  required  for  100  pounds  of  pork,  while  on 
farms  producing  over  35,000  pounds,  2  hours  of  man  labor  and  %  hour 
of  horse  labor  were  used. 

Likewise,  building  and  equipment  expenses  bear  a  close  relation 
to  the  amount  of  pork  produced.  They  are  comparatively  low  since 
hogs  do  not  require  expensive  equipment.  On  some  farms,  however, 
unwise  expenditures  materially  increase  the  charge  for  this  item. 
Large  producers  had  an  expense  of  only  14  cents  for  equipment  and 
18  cents  for  miscellaneous  expense,  while  on  the  farms  with  the  smaller 
production  these  items  amounted  to  26  cents  and  24  cents  (Table  8). 
Advantages  with  respect  to  equipment  costs,  in  larger  production,  are 
readily  recognized.  Water  systems,  self-feeders,  and  hog  waterers,  for 
example,  may  care  for  a  large  number  of  hogs  as  satisfactorily  as  for 
smaller  numbers.  A  large-sized  enterprise  frequently  may  justify  the 
use  of  more  expensive  equipment  than  may  be  economical  where  pro- 
duction is  small  (Tables  2,  3,  4,  5;  6). 


1927]  THE  PLACE  OF  HOG  PRODUCTION  IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING  163 

The  interest  charge  on  hogs  does  not  change  with  the  number  of 
hogs  produced,  but  it  may  be  noted  that  it  is  relatively  light,  amount- 
ing usually  to  less  than  3  percent  of  the  total  cost.  Since  hogs  increase 
rapidly  and  mature  at  an  early  age,  the  necessary  investment  in  breed- 
ing stock  is  low  compared  with  the  value  of  young  animals  produced. 

While  it  might  seem  that  with  large  herds  there  is  more  danger 
of  the  premises  becoming  infected  with  disease,  and  greater  losses  in 
case  of  infection,  on  the  other  hand,  a  large  producer  is  apt  to  give 
more  attention  to  sanitation  and  disease  control.  There  is  no  evidence 
from  the  studies  made  that  the  percentage  of  loss  is  any  higher  on 
farms  having  a  large  enterprise. 

Hogs  Reduce  Expense  of  Harvesting  Crops 

When  crops  raised  on  the  farm,  including  grains  and  legumes,  are 
fed  off  rather  than  harvested,  swine  production  takes  a  more  impor- 
tant place  in  the  economical  operation  of  the  farm  than  it  otherwise 
would. 

The  present  cost  of  harvesting  corn  is  about  10  cents  a  bushel, 
according  to  recent  studies.  When  hogs  are  used  to  harvest  the  crops, 
the  amount  of  expensive  farm  labor  is  reduced  at  the  growing  and 
harvesting  seasons,  which  are  the  busiest  of  the  year.  Not  only  are 
the  crops  harvested  with  less  labor,  but  less  time  is  needed  for  the 
daily  hog  chores. 

While  feeding-off  crops  often  involves  additional  labor  and  ma- 
terial to  fence  fields  to  hold  hogs,  the  annual  cost  for  these  items  is 
much  less  than  the  cost  of  harvesting  the  crop.  Moreover,  fencing  can 
be  done  during  off  seasons  and  on  days  when  it  is  too  wet  to  harvest 
crops  or  to  do  other  field  work.  Altho  this  practice  may  not  give  the 
most  efficient  use  of  feed,  there  is  a  gain  from  the  saving  of  labor  and 
the  return  of  fertility  to  the  land. 

Hogs  Rightly  Handled  Help  Maintain  Soil 

Many  farmers  who  are  practicing  improved  methods  of  hog  sani- 
tation and  are  using  movable  houses  which  are  taken  from  field  to 
field  on  succeeding  years  are  using  .hogs  successfully  in  helping  to 
maintain  or  to  build  up  the  soil.  When  crops  are  completely  fed  off 
with  hogs  confined  in  the  field  growing  the  flfcp,  a  minimum  of  plant 
food  is  lost  and  the  problem  of  maintaining  the  soil  for  the  following 
year  is  largely  solved. 

In  these  studies  no  credit  was  given  hogs  for  soil  improvement 
because  the  practices  employed  in  handling  them  are  not  standardized 
and  most  farmers  are  not  yet  making  the  best  use  of  them  as  a  means 
of  improving  the  soil.  While  it  is  difficult  to  place  a  value  on  manure 
for  crop  production,  field  experiments  conducted  by  the  Agronomy 
Department  of  the  University  of  Illinois  indicate  that  $1.50  a  ton  is 


164  BULLETIN  No.  301  [December, 

a  conservative  estimate  when  the  manure  is  applied  to  the  brown  silt 
loam  soil  found"  thruout  central  Illinois.  The  feeding-off  of  a  50- 
bushel  corn  crop,  together  with  the  feeding  of  8  to  10  percent  of 
protein  concentrates,  may  be  considered  the  equivalent  of  returning 
3  tons  of  manure  to  the  land.1  A  credit  of  $4.50  an  acre  under  these 
circumstances  might  therefore  be  given  to  the  hog  enterprise. 

Where  a  considerable  part  of  the  feeding  is  done  in  dry  lots  and 
little  of  the  manure  is  returned  to  the  tilled  land,  it  is  difficult  to  de- 
termine a  fair  credit.  Also,  the  value  of  the  manure  recovered  is  off- 
set in  part  by  the  cost  of  hauling  it  to  the  field.  However,  the  indi- 
vidual hog  producer  may  well  consider  the  advantage  of  hog  produc- 
tion in  helping  to  maintain  the  productivity  of  his  land  and  credit  his 
hog  enterprise  to  the  extent  that  it  contributes  to  that  end. 

Possibilities  of  Finishing  Hogs  for  Better  Seasonal  Markets 

Hogs  sell  better  at  certain  times  of  the  year  than  at  others,  owing 
largely  to  the  uneven  supply  going  to  market.  Spring  pigs  usually 
command  a  higher  price  in  August,  September,  and  October  than  in 
November,  December,  and  January.  Fall  pigs  similarly  are  usually 
marketed  at  a  better  price  in  March,  April,  and  May.  One  may  well 
consider,  therefore,  directing  his  hog  production  so  as  to  bring  the 
hogs  to  normal  market  weight  at  a  time  when  the  better  prices  are  to 
be  expected.  The  possibility  of  feeding  to  heavier  or  lighter  weights, 
in  response  to  temporary  market  conditions,  which  is  another  matter, 
is  discussed  at  length  in  Part  III,  pages  169  to  178. 

Over  the  twenty-five-year  period  from  1901  to  1925  the  highest 
seasonal  price  of  hogs  occurred  on  the  average  during  the  fall  months 
and  again  during  the  spring,  with  the  highest  monthly  price  in  Sep- 
tember (Fig.  5).  During  the  five  years  from  1921  to  1925  prices  were 
highest  in  March  and  April  and  again  in  August,  September,  and  Oc- 
tober. However,  the  price  in  September  and  October  has  been  some- 
what lower  than  in  August.  The  average  price  in  March  is  apt  to  be 
relatively  much  higher  than  at  any  other  time  of  year,  tho  occasionally 
when  bad  roads  delay  winter  marketing  until  that  time,  prices  tend 
to  stay  low. 

While  both  curves  in  Fig.  5  show  the  price  of  hogs  to  have  been 
higher  in  spring  and  again  in  fall  than  at  other  times  of  the  year,  the 
difference  in  the  trend  of  prices  shown  in  the  two  curves  calls  for 
further  explanation  and  the  question  may  be  raised  whether  the  curve 
for  the  later  period  (1921-1925)  may  not  be  a  better  basis  for  judging 
the  seasonal  variation  that  farmers  are  now  likely  to  encounter  than 
the  curve  representing  the  past  twenty-five  years. 

The  reason  for  the  differences  in  the  two  curves  probably  is  found 
in  the  change  which  has  taken  place  in  the  methods  of  raising  hogs 

'Based  on  "Feeds  and  Feeding"  by  Henry  and  Morrison. 


1927] 


THE  PLACE  OF  HOG  PRODUCTION  IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING 


165 


during  the  past  twenty-five  years.  Under  the  dry-lot  method  of  feed- 
ing which  prevailed  prior  to  about  fifteen  years  ago,  very  few  hog 
raisers  succeeded  in  bringing  their  spring  pigs  to  market  weight  by 
September.  Naturally  considerable  premium  was  paid  for  spring  pigs 
which  could  be  put  on  the  market  at  that  time.  Also,  a  larger  pro- 
portion of  the  hogs  than  at  present  were  held  until  they  were  at  least 
a  year  old,  and  this  tended  to  spread  out  the  heavy  marketing  of 
spring  pigs  from  about  November  thru  the  next  May  or  June.  Gradu- 
ally* the  practice  of  better  disease  and  parasite  control  and  better 


Jan.  Feb.    Mar  Apr.    May  June  July  Auy.  Sept.  Oct.     Nov.   Dec 

FIG.  5. — AVERAGE  MONTHLY  PRICE  OF  HOGS  AT  CHICAGO, 

1901-1925  AND  1921-1925 

The  prices  for  the  five-year  period  "1921-1925  are 
probably  better  indicators  of  future  monthly  varia- 
tions than  are  those  for  the  twenty-five-year  period. 


feeding  methods,  together  with  a  change  in  the  type  of  hog  produced, 
has  made  it  possible  to  market  hogs  at  an  earlier  age.  A  larger  pro- 
portion of  the  spring  pigs  are  therefore  reaching  market  in  August 
and  September  and  the  bulk  are  marketed  before  March;  this  has 
been  reflected  in  the  upward  trend  in  prices  from  January  to  March 
over  the  past  five  years.  A  few  producers  of  fall  pigs  are  able  to  put 
them  on  the  market  in  March,  when  fewer  hogs  are  normally  mar- 
keted. The  greater  part  of  the  fall  pigs,  however,  are  not  marketed 
until  April,  May,  or  June,  and  this  tends  to  depress  prices  during  the 
latter  part  of  this  period. 

The  foregoing  facts  may  then  indicate  that  the  normal  seasonal 
variation  in  the  price  of  hogs  is  changing  more  definitely  to  that  shown 
during  the  past  few  years.  While  it  is  of  course  true  that  the  prices 
from  1921  to  1925  have  been  influenced  by  rather  abnormal  market 


166  BULLETIN  No.  301  [December, 

conditions,  reflecting  some  of  the  consequences  of  the  agricultural  de- 
pression, the  period  is  long  enough  to  justify  giving  consideration  to 
the  price  tendencies  evidenced  during  that  time. 

Of  equal  consideration  with  price,  in  determining  the  time  of  year 
when  it  will  be  most  advantageous  to  market  hogs,  is  the  matter  of 
the  cost  of  producing  hogs  for  different  seasonal  markets.  The  oppor- 
tunity of  using  forage,  the  possibility  of  feeding  off  grain  crops  (thus 
saving  the  cost  of  harvesting  and  feeding) ,  the  relative  price  and  feed- 
ing value  of  old  and  new  corn,  and  the  larger  credit  which  may  be 
given  hogs  for  the  fertility  returned  to  the  soil  where  crops  are  fed  off, 
all  enter  into  the  question.  Also,  in  planning  to  feed  off  crops,  it  is  ad- 
vantageous to  plan  late  spring  farrowing  in  order  to  avoid  early  spring 
losses  from  poor  weather  conditions. 

Spring  pigs  finished  for  sale  in  August,  September,  or  October 
must,  of  course,  be  grown  rapidly,  and  a  full  grain  ration  is  therefore 
essential.  This  means  that  most  of  the  gains  must  be  made  on  old 
corn  and  that  the  full  use  cannot  be  made  of  forage  crops.  With  hogs 
finishing  two  or  three  months  later,  more  use  may  be  made  of  forage 
and  the  new  corn  crop  can  be- used  at  least  in  part;  this  tends  to  re- 
duce the  cost  of  feed  at  least  to  the  extent  of  the  cost  of  holding  the 
old  corn  in  storage  for  a  year.  Also,  a  part  of  the  new  corn  crop  may 
be  fed  off,  and  this  reduces  the  amount  of  high-priced  labor  otherwise 
necessary  in  harvesting  it. 

While,  as  already  noted,  the  price  of  hogs  is  usually  high  in 
March,  April,  and  May,  the  cost  of  finishing  fall  pigs  for  the  spring 
market  under  farm  conditions  usually  is  higher  than  in  finishing  spring 
pigs  for  the  fall  market.  This  is  due  to  less  use  of  forage  crops,  the 
greater  amount  of  labor  required,  and  the  difficulty  of  controlling 
disease  and  parasites  when  the  hogs  are  not  on  pasture.  Also,  condi- 
tions on  many  farms  during  the  winter  are  not  conducive  to  the  most 
economical  gains. 

Unless  a  greater  difference  than  the  average  exists  between  the 
price  of  old  and  new  corn,  the  advantage  of  the  cheaper  gains  on  new 
corn  may  be  entirely  offset  by  lower  prices.  The  small  supply  of 
hogs  sent  to  market  during  the  early  fall  months  tends  to  keep  up 
the  prices  at  that  season,  but  as  more  producers  get  into  the  habit 
of  marketing  hogs  then,  the  advantage  will  tend  to  disappear.  Of 
course  when  the  hog  supply  is  short,  prices  will  tend  to  stay  high; 
consequently  there  are  years  when  little  or  no  disadvantage  results 
from  marketing  during  the  winter  months.  Under  such  conditions 
hogs  may  well  be  held  to  heavier  weights,  as  discussed  in  Part  III. 

Men  Vary  in  Ability  to  Keep  Costs  Down 

Success  in  hog  production  is  dependent  largely  upon  skilful  man- 
agement. This  fact  may  be  illustrated  by  the  records  of  the  ten  farms 
in  Champaign  and  Piatt  counties  shown  in  Table  9  and  Fig.  6. 


1927] 


THE  PLACE  OF  HOG  PRODUCTION  IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING 


167 


The  average  cost  of  producing  pork  on  these  ten  farms  ranged 
from  $7.76  to  $13.72  a  100  pounds,  a  difference  between  the  lowest 
and  highest  cost  of  $5.96.  None  of  the  men  were  large  hog  producers, 
for  only  2,000  to  a  little  over  12,000  pounds  of  pork  was  produced 
annually  per  farm.  The  cost  of  feed  is  the  item  mainly  responsible 
for  the  wide  variations  among  the  ten  farms.  This  cost  ranged  from 
$5.91  on  Farm  2  to  $10.70  on  Farm  10.  The  amount  of  concentrates 
fed  for  100  pounds  of  gain  varied  from  488  pounds  on  Farm  5  to  791 
pounds  on  Farm  10.  Man  labor  varied  from  1.6  hours  on  Farm  1  to 
6.7  hours  on  Farm  9. 


$14 

/3 


'8    9 


-m 


* 


^/_       —       •       .        :;:;:.;:.:;.-:.- 


Farm  No.     I 


IO 


\Feed 


\Buildings  £ 
•  Equipment 


Man  Labor    [  "Ahorse  Labor  ^^  Interest 
\  Overhead         1JII  Miscellaneous 


FIG.  6. — VARIATIONS  IN  THE  COST  OF  PRODUCING  100  POUNDS  OF 

PORK  ON  TEN  FARMS  IN  THE  SAME  AREA 
Differences  in  the  management  ability  of  the  operators  are 
strikingly  illustrated  by  these  variations  in  cost  on  ten  Champaign 
and  Piatt  county  farms  during  the  four  years  1922-1925. 

These  facts  are  significant  because  they  represent  the  average  of 
a  four-year  period.  The  differences  are  then  due,  not  to  misfortune, 
but  to  typical  differences  in  management.  A  man  occasionally  has  a 
poor  year,  but  some  of  these  men  were  consistently  more  successful 
than  others.  When  some  men  are  using  60  percent  more  feed  and  four 
times  as  much  labor  as  are  other  men,  it  is  apparent  that  there  is  large 
opportunity  for  improvement  in  methods  of  production. 


168 


BULLETIN  No.  301 


[December, 


CD  CO  CM  O  CO  CO  CO    _ 

OS  O5  1-1  CO  CM  t»  CM    iO  .  T»I  O>  OS  CO  •*    CO 

•o  r-  o  >i5 1-  co  co 

-OCM  -    * 

0 1-1 t-  OS  i-l  CO  00    CM  •*       Cf*1       «5 

t-COOCMCOO»O    t-          .OOr-iOOCM    -* 

jl-l  CM 

OS  ^}*  CO  •— I  O3 t*-  Oi  t*~  O    COCO    CO 

15  CO  O  T)<  T»<  CO  O  00    .^t^SOOCO  «5       00   CO-* 

-H     —r~  I-H   - 

t-  t~  U5  O>  O  "5  b-    _ 

cOUSi-llNINi-lO'-l          .O><Nb-cOCMCO     O       t-       -*i-i       t~ 

?O  CO  00       rH  CO    f*     i— '       t^       CO  i-H 

CO  CO  CO  CO  i-*  00  OO    ^1  00       CM  CM       t— 

CDi-l  i-l         O       >O  90  CO  CM  CO  U5    U5 

1-1       ~»00<NCO       CM 

i-H  i-H  r-<  CM  CO  O  IN     O  CO         CO"-* 

^1  T-*  i— (  CO  i— *  CO  CO    CM          .^OOSOCM    *O  ^       00  ^j< 

r-t       '^'O  CM    CO 

ee  •»         co  co 

§00  co  1-1  CD  co  **<  a>  co     cot-     >n 

OOi-<CM(Nh-O    CO          .-HCOOCDOO    i-l  CO       COCO       "5 

t~  O>       ;£>  CO  >O  "15  CM  I-H    CO 

IO  CO  O  CM  00  CO  O3    O  00       t~*ej*        15 

115  O  1-1  CM  1-1  U5  ri    00          .  •*  •*  O  CM  O    O     O       CM       ij<t^       t^ 

93 >  '  ««O3 

CO  i— '  OO'^Oi'— IOCMCOOOW5^*  _rt 

**^iO  Tl<    O     115 

•  IN  CO  CM  CM  Ti<  CD    CO  rj<        T»(       CM  00        "5 

lOOOCMi-icDCO       MI       CO  ,- 

5  CO  CM    »15     i-*  * 

1-1 U5  CM  •*  t- CO  CO    00  CO       T?       i-icO       O 

iO  00       "^  O>  i— '       CO  O 

9»  «9  TH 

U5  CO  O3  CO  i-*  ^  »O    CO  CM       •«*<  t>- 

•OCOTJ"        t-O5    CO      O        «5        i-H 
~U5CM  1-1    O     CM 

:  :  :  :  :  | 

:*•  2  I    " 

ill  Sj   1 

8:-g  |   -g  -"f    I 

d   •  &  o   -2     ,       a  $     S, 
•j**m.m    ~       -a^-aaRgSo- 

!||  I  j    Sjq   -a 

S  -§^S^i|H     ^a»Sr^H   "I     £     <S°     a 

23-S8         §o«5=S        o     a     22    -3 
^«.a        IOOO^H      tf 

fa  S2M^«OS  •<  PM      KB      H 


1927]  THE  PLACE  OF  HOG  PRODUCTION  IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING  169 

It  is  not  the  purpose  of  this  bulletin  to  analyze  in  detail  the  extent 
to  which  different  practices  are  responsible  for  the  wide  variation  in 
cost  of  producing  pork,  but  a  study  of  these  farms  shows  that  the 
more  important  factors  accounting  for  the  lower  costs  are  a  larger 
number  of  pigs  weaned  per  litter,  better  sanitation  and  disease  con- 
trol, the  use  of  forage  crops,  better  selection  of  feeds,  better  use  of 
labor  and  equipment,  and  the  larger  size  of  the  enterprise.  A  producer 
may  well  scrutinize  the  management  of  his  hog  enterprise  with  these 
points  in  mind. 


PART   III— HOG   PRODUCTION   A   MEANS   OF   ADJUSTING 
SALE  OF  FARM  PRODUCTS  TO  MARKET  CONDITIONS 

To  the  corn-belt  farmer  hog  production  offers  a  means  by  which, 
with  a  minimum  disturbance  to  other  farm  plans,  he  can  best  take 
advantage  of  changing  price  conditions.  The  swine  enterprise  is 
flexible  compared  with  other  livestock  enterprises.  Hogs  may  be  in- 
creased in  numbers  in  a  short  time,  and  they  may  be  sold  at  varying 
weights  without  meeting  serious  price  disadvantages.  Because  of  this 
flexibility  the  proportion  of  products  sold  as  corn  or  as  hogs  can  be 
changed  within  a  relatively  brief  period  of  time. 

The  acreages  of  the  staple  crops  on  most  farms  cannot  be  changed 
so  as  to  take  advantage  of  the  markets  because  yields  cannot  be 
anticipated  and  the  relative  price  of  staple  crops  is  dependent  largely 
upon  total  production.  Also,  crop  enterprises  cannot  be  changed  in 
size  without  danger  of  interfering  with  the  rotation  of  crops  or  with 
the  adjustments  of  labor  and  power  in  such  a  way  as  to  increase  the 
costs  of  operation.  As  compared  with  crop  production,  the  swine  en- 
terprise requires  a  relatively  small  amount  of  labor,  which  is  well  dis- 
tributed thruout  the  year,  and  its  size  therefore  can  be  changed  con- 
siderably without  seriously  interfering  with  the  economic  organization 
and  operation  of  the  farm. 

Recognizing  that  the  prices  of  corn  and  hogs  do  not  bear  a  con- 
stant relation  to  each  other  and  that  hog  production  is  flexible,  it  is 
evident  that  the  most  successful  hog  producer  will  be  the  man  who, 
in  addition  to  producing  hogs  efficiently,  adjusts  the  production  of 
hogs  to  price  conditions. 

Forces  which  help  determine  the  demand  for  and  the  supply  of 
hogs  brought  to  market,  and  the  resulting  price  changes,  are  analyzed 
in  Bulletin  293  of  this  Station,  "Adjusting  Hog  Production  to  Market 
Demand."  As  brought  out  in  that  study,  when  the  relative  prices  of 
corn  and  hogs  can  be  anticipated,  a  larger  or  smaller  number  of  brood 
sows  can  be  kept  and  either  one  or  two  litters  of  pigs  raised  each  year. 
Within  a  year  this  will  materially  change  the  numbers  available  for 
market.  At  times  feeder  pigs  may  be  bought  to  good  advantage. 


170  BULLETIN  No.  301  [December, 

While  the  above  points  are  well  recognized,  less  study  has  been 
given  to  the  possibility  of  selling  hogs  at  lighter  or  heavier  weights. 
Hogs  of  the  right  type  may  be  marketed  at  175  pounds,  or  if  condi- 
tions warrant,  they  may  be  fed  to  300  or  even  to  350  pounds.  The 
producer  of  corn  and  hogs  can  therefore  change  considerably  the  pro- 
portion of  corn  and  hogs  which  he  sells  without  changing  the  number 
of  hogs  raised.  The  advantage  of  this  practice  of  feeding  to  lighter  or 
heavier  weights  in  order  to  vary  the  marketing  of  corn  and  hogs  de- 
serves careful  consideration  because  of  the  short  time  required  to 
make  the  adjustment. 

Selling  at  Light  or  Heavy  Weights 

With  a  large  supply  of  corn  available  at  relatively  low  prices,  the 
main  problem  of  the  man  with  hogs  on  hand  is  the  weight  to  which 
it  is  profitable  to  feed.1  In  deciding  this  point  he  must  give  due  con- 
sideration to  five  factors,  in  addition  to  his  own  efficiency  in  feeding 
hogs  and  the  thrift  of  the  hogs:  (1)  the  number  of  hogs  and  the 
amount  of  corn  available,  (2)  the  current  prices  of  corn  and  hogs,  (3) 
the  probable  trend  of  the  hog  market,  (4)  the  additional  amount  of 
feed  required  to  produce  100  pounds  of  gain  as  the  hogs  increase  in 
weight,  and  (5)  the  probable  relative  prices  of  light  and  heavy  hogs 
when  marketed.2 


JOver  a  long  period  of  time  the  average  market  price  of  hogs  per  hundred- 
weight has  been  equal  to  the  market  price  of  11.4  bushels  of  corn.  During  the 
past  fourteen  years  there  have  been  four  periods  when  it  has  taken  less  than  this 
amount  of  corn  to  equal  the  price  of  100  pounds  of  hogs — 1915,  1917,  1920,  and 
again  in  1923  and  1924.  At  other  times  11.4  bushels  of  corn  more  than  equalled 
the  price  of  100  pounds  of  pork.  These  cycles  of  high  and  low  hog  prices  in  rela- 
tion to  corn  prices  have  lasted  about  42  months  on  an  average.  The  man  who 
consistently  brings  hogs  to  250  pounds  at  a  cost  equal  to  the  price  of  9  bushels 
or  less  of  corn  for  every  100  pounds  of  gain  will  find  few  times  when  he  cannot 
produce  hogs  at  a  profit.  The  less  efficient  producer,  whose  costs  exceed  the  price 
of  14  bushels  of  corn,  will  seldom  realize  a  profit.  Between  these  extremes,  how- 
ever, are  many  men  who,  by  giving  more  attention  to  market  conditions,  could 
guide  production  to  more  profitable  ends.  That  is,  even  tho  they  may  not  be 
the  most  efficient  producers  so  far  as  costs  of  production  are  concerned,  they 
could  increase  their  incomes  by  learning  better  how  to  adjust  their  production  to 
market  conditions. 

2The  year  1926  illustrates  well  the  advantages  to  be  gained  by  feeding  hogs 
to  heavy  weights.  The  farm  price  of  100  pounds  of  hogs  during  this  year  was 
equal  to  the  farm  price  of  more  than  16  bushels  of  corn.  Hogs  were  scarce, 
while  corn  was  abundant  on  most  farms.  Also,  there  was  little  prospect  of  any 
increase  in  the  number  of  hogs  to  go  to  market  either  late  in  the  year  or  early 
in  1927,  and  the  outbreak  of  cholera  in  the  fall  still  further  reduced  the  number 
going  to  market.  The  fall  of  1923,  on  the  other  hand,  offers  an  example  of  a 
time  when  most  producers  could  not  have  afforded  to  feed  hogs  to  heavy 
weights,  for  from  August  1,  1923,  until  a  year  later  the  price  of  100  pounds  of 
hogs  was  less  than  the  price  of  10  bushels  of  corn. 


1927] 


THE  PLACE  OF  HOG  PRODUCTION  IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING 


171 


Two  facts  suggested  by  the  above  statement  deserve  emphasis; 
namely,  that  success  in  feeding  hogs  to  heavy  weights  depends  upon  a 
man's  efficiency  in  production;  and  that  as  hogs  increase  in  weight 
more  feed  is  required  for  a  given  gain. 

Feed  Required  for  Gains  at  Different  Weights 

Under  good  conditions  about  350  pounds  of  feed,  including  grain 
and  protein  concentrates,  are  required  to  put  100  pounds  on  hogs 
weighing  between  100  and  150  pounds,  while  about  450  pounds  of  feed 
are  necessary  to  put  this  gain  on  hogs  that  weigh  over  300  pounds. 
On  the  basis  of  the  information  given  in  Table  10,  the  probable  feed 


TABLE  10. — FEED  REQUIRED  TO  PRODUCE  100  POUNDS  OF  GAIN  ON  HOGS 
AT  DIFFERENT  WEIGHTS1 


In  gaining  from  — 

Corn 

Tankage 

Total 

100  pounds  to  150  pounds  

Ibs. 
314.6 

Ibs. 
30.4 

Ibs. 
345 

150  pounds  to  200  pounds  

343.2 

29.8 

373 

200  pounds  to  250  pounds  

370.9 

30.1 

401 

250  pounds  to  300  pounds  

398.5 

30.5 

429 

300  pounds  to  350  pounds  

425.0 

31.0 

456 

'Calculated  from  data  reported  in  Bulletin  335,  Ohio  Agricultural  Experiment  Station. 


TABLE  11. — FEED  COST  OF  PUTTING  100  POUNDS  OF  GAIN  ON  HOGS  OF 
DIFFERENT  WEIGHTS.! 

(Tankage  at  $70  a  ton)2 


Cost  of  feed  in  gaining  from — 


Corn  required  for  100  pounds  gain*  

100  pounds 
to 
150  pounds 

150  pounds 
to 
200  pounds 

200  pounds 
to 
250  pounds 

250  pounds 
to 
300  pounds 

300  pounds 
to 
350  pounds 

315  pounds 

343  pounds 

371  pounds 

399  pounds 

426  pounds 

Price  of  corn  per  bushel  — 
$  .50  

$3.87 
4.15 
4.43 
4.71 
4.99 
5.27 
5.56 
5.84 
6.12 
6.40 
6.68 

$4.12 
4.42 
4.73 
5.04 
5.34 
5.65 
5.96 
6.26 
6.57 
6.87 
7.18 

$4.37 
4.70 
5.03 
5.36 
5.69 
6.02 
6.36 
6.69 
7.02 
7.35 
7.68 

$4.62 
4.97 
5.33 
5.69 
6.04 
6.40 
6.76 
7.11 
7.47 
7.82 
8.18 

$4.86 
5.24 
5.62 
6.00 
6.38 
6.76 
7.14 
7.52 
7.90 
8.28 
8.66 

.55  

.60  

.65  

.70  

.75  

.80  

.85  

.90  

.95  

1.00  

'To  determine  the  total  cost  of  putting  additional  weight  on  hogs,  add  10  to  15  percent  to  the 
above  coat  to  cover  man  and  horse  labor,  use  of  equipment,  risk  or  insurance,  interest  on  investment, 
and  miscellaneous  items.  The  percentage  will  vary,  depending  upon  the  equipment  and  the  facilities 
for  handling  hogs. 

2If  the  price  of  tankage  is  higher  (or  lower)  than  $70,  add  to  (or  subtract  from)  the  values  given 
in  the  table  7.5  cents  for  each  $5  change  in  price. 

'In  addition  to  the  corn,  30  pounds  of  tankage  on  the  average  will  be  required  for  each  100  pounds 
of  gain  thruout. 


172  BULLETIN  No.  301  [December, 

cost  of  producing  100  pounds  gain  on  hogs  of  different  weights  has 
been  calculated  with  different  prices  for  corn.  These  costs  are  given 
in  Table  11. 

Of  course  these  tables  are  to  be  taken  merely  as  guides.  The  feed 
costs  are  what  may  be  expected  only  if  the  hogs  are  handled  properly 
and  fed  a  well-balanced  palatable  ration.  If  either  the  feeds  or  the 
animals  are  not  of  good  quality,  or  if  conditions  under  which  they  are 
fed  are  not  satisfactory,  more  expensive  gains  can  certainly  be  ex- 
pected. Whether  or  not  the  figures  are  representative  of  any  par- 
ticular farm  depends  upon  the  efficiency  of  the  manager  in  handling 
hogs,  and  of  this  the  individual  must  be  his  own  judge. 

Thrifty  hogs  properly  fed  and  handled  may  be  expected  to  gain 
about  50  pounds  a  month  after  reaching  a  weight  of  150  pounds.  Hogs 
weighing  200  pounds  in  September,  if  full  fed,  should  weigh  350 
pounds  in  December,  or  fall  pigs  weighing  200  pounds  in  March 
should  weigh  350  pounds  in  June  under  favorable  conditions.  The 
comparison  of  the  prices  of  light  and  heavy  hogs  should  be  made, 
then,  between  the  current  price  of  light  hogs  and  the  price  of  heavy 
hogs  about  three  months  later. 

Probable  Prices  for  Different  Weights  When  Marketed 

Except  for  the  months  of  November,  December,  January,  and 
February,  and  occasionally  during  these  months,  light  hogs  usually 
sell  for  a  higher  price  than  heavy  hogs  at  the  same  date  (Table  12) . 
Almost  without  exception,  however,  the  prices  of  light  hogs  in  August. 
September,  and  October  are  considerably  higher  than  the  prices  of 
heavy  hogs  three  months  later,  when  the  bulk  of  spring  pigs  are  mar- 
keted. If  fall  pigs  are  thrifty,  there  is  usually  an  advantage  in  feed- 
ing to  heavy  weights,  since  the  price  of  heavy  hogs  in  May,  June,  and 
July  is  usually  good  compared  with  the  price  of  light  hogs  three 
months  earlier. 

Table  13  has  been  arranged  to  show  the  value  of  spring  pigs  if 
sold  in  August,  September,  October,  or  November  at  a  weight  of  200 
pounds,  and  the  value  of  the  same  pigs  if  carried  to  350  pounds  and 
sold  three  months  later.  An  example  of  how  this  table  may  be  read 
would  be  this:  In  August,  1922,  200-pound  hogs  were  selling  in 
Chicago  for  $9.84  a  hundredweight,  or  for  $19.68  a  head.  The  same 
hog  fed  out  until  November  to  a  weight  of  350  pounds  would  sell  for 
$8.25  a  hundredweight,  or  $28.88.  The  hog  fed  to  heavy  weight  would 
be  worth  $9.20  more  than  if  sold  at  the  light  weight.  After  deducting 
the  cost  of  tankage  and  other  costs  excepting  grain,  there  would  be 
$7.13  left  to  pay  for  the  grain  fed.  Assuming  that  it  would  require 
10.7  bushels  of  corn  to  secure  this  added  weight,  67  cents  a  bushel 
would  be  returned  for  the  corn  fed.  In  that  month  the  corn  in 
Chicago  was  worth  63  cents  a  bushel  on  a  new-corn  basis;  hence  a 


1927] 


THE  PLACE  OF  Hoa  PRODUCTION  IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING 


173 


3 

I 


2S 


COC5O 


O  OS  OS  O  OOC5  X  00       O5 


osji 


OlOSOOOOOCOOOOOOOt-t- 


xfr 


ilJJI 

SESSs 


03  CO 

SP 


gpa 
"81 


0 

ICdR 

«  a 

—    V 

•**  .* 

S3 
^£ 

-    V 

£* 


174 


BULLETIN  No.  301 


[December, 


§ 

5 
o 

H 

§  O 
O  >-i 


El 

^  w 
W 

<  H 


ffl  = 

o  g 


~. 

Sg 


CO 


go     „- 

•c  s  a  s  a 

aSoog1 

<D    t>T!           0 
|l1W:a 

SB1°° 

1°  *« 

<;«« 

lOW^tO      COCOCOt-      5OO>-«O       •'(•COOCO      {S'J'CO.-c 
T}<  n<  T}«  T«       COCOtOtO       OOOOt-t-       OO"-""-!       t»t»h-t» 

10 
•M 

91 

M 

0 

i 

g 

s 

"5  CO  CON 

t^t-t-t- 

•» 

'In  the  above  table  50  cents  is  allowed  to  cover  the  cost  of  items  other  than  feed  in  carrying  a  hog  from  200  pounds  to  350  pounds.  It  is  assumed  also  that 
tankage  will  cost  $70  a  ton,  or  that  the  45  pounds  of  tankage  which  might  be  required  would  cost  $1.57.  The  difference  in  the  total  value  of  light  and  heavy  hogs 
is  reduced  by  $2.07,  therefore,  to  cover  cost  of  tankage  and  other  costs  except  grain. 
!It  is  assumed  that  under  good  conditions  10.7  bushels  of  corn  will  be  required  to  make  the  additional  gain  of  150  pounds. 
•During  fall  and  early  winter  farmers  in  general  are  using  new  corn  for  feeding.  This  seldom  grades  as  good  as  No.  3,  which  at  this  season  is  old  corn.  The 
prices  used  here  are  therefore  for  No.  3  corn  reduced  by  7  percent  to  put  them  on  a  new  corn  basis.  This  is  a  conservative  estimate  of  the  cost  of  holding  cornon 
the  farm  for  a  year. 

w 

ii.il 

U|5 

W      ^"o 

•-IOC*  CO      t-cO^t-       <N--<OO5       COINt-O       CNOCNIN 
INiOOOcO       COCOt^CC       CO"3t-00       i-iCO^O       F4O<Oi9 

"5Ot^OO 

r^oooco 
«» 

•» 

«  sis 

«  <s  o  a 
2g|& 

V  VJB4* 

Bill 

SJ-al 
fi« 

•-HONO9     eoi-i'Hco     >-io>  1-1^1     ^-4O5<-io     momco 
pjcoccco     r-ioosco     cof  Tjurj     1-iot-co     oi«OMco 

gCO(NO> 
lo^t- 

00  00  ^  ^* 

•» 

CM"OOOt^      t^t^t^OJ       S0tf300O>       C^TJIIOO      i-iOtDt- 

• 

g'o-O  3> 

a  »  a  2 

g  3  OJ-S 

ta1^> 

S  •*  MoJ 

Q.S-.S 

OOt^OtO       OOOOOO       OO<OOOi-i       OOcOOOt^       CMCOCNO 
CMCOOO^<       OJOCS^       tDiOTjicD       i-iJ-it^W       Ot-CO^t 

I>-OC»«O 
OtD'fl'OO 

OOCOCD 

«« 

•*t»OO5        O5O5O3-*        Odt»O-^        T}<!Ot-M        -<1<(NOOO3 

350-pound  hogs 

Value  per 
hog 

oomcoo     ooo^o     TCOOCO     OOOOO-H     o-^oo 

—1OO»-^" 
CO  CMOS  CD 

ooi-im 

9» 

Tj>Tj<t^C<5      OOOOOOt-       Tj«Tj<U5iO       M>Ot^OS       OSCO'-iCM 
(NINCMCO       (NININN       (M  N  IN  <N       CO  CC  CO  CO       CO  CO  •*  •* 

Price  per  cwt. 
of  hogs  weighing 
over  250  pounds 

OOOOOCO       lOCO—HO       M'WfOOO       cOrH—  10      h-COt^O 
O»r~®       IMININO5       OO«N^-i       >0^-it~IN       COOOt^O 

CO  CO  Tit  .-H 

COCDr-cO 

r-cot-cs     cxioooot^     t^r^t^t-     »OO^     r-io—nN 

re-year  av 

OOOOOO) 

m 

Month  sold 

s 

November  
December  
January  
February  

|i^i  li^b  |ix&  |i^i  li^ 

H  d  M  •          B  <1  M  4          C    G    (-    03          M   £S  M   •          H  d  H  4 

im  im  liii  iiii  im 

o^S-2     ells     °Sg-g     oSg-g     ogg-S 
ZQ^fe    ^O^fe    ^Q^fe    ZQ^fe    ^Q^£ 

200-pound  hogs 

Value  per 
hog 

SOO^TJI       OONffltD       tO^C^IN       OOINO-*       00  00  00  O 
t-cocs     «3t^t»-<j(     osooO"5     cqiNi>o     r~(Noo® 

•*QOOO 
CM  CO  "5  1^ 

O  OS  00  CO 

8j-"— 

OCDeD^       O5O500«D       mt~Tj«CO      OO5O5t^       "3"5<NC^ 

8 

Price  per  cwt. 
of  hogs  weighing 
150-200  pounds 

«5O>t-N       TjftOOOCO      OONi-itO       -"Jii-imiN       O^'^'O 
NMrHrH       OOOOCOIN      OS'O'S't-       CDCOOO'O       OO  CO  Tl<  CO 

CNOU3O 
1-1  00  IN  CO 

OOC5  00 

•» 

OOOOOt^      O5O5OOO      t-«t»5O      CSOCJOO      (N(Ni-i-H 

M 

Year  and 
month  sold 

August  
September  
October  
November  

.^.u       !  t-    .  u       .h.h       .h.^       .  t-    .  t- 

Q>m               4>V               V.Q)                O      .    o                V.0> 

:^s  t.j3      :.Q  t^5     :^3  ^ja      :j=  ^.a      :^  ^^5 

•g  a_g  a   «  B  «  e   -nQ%B  -g  s_§  s   BS_ga 

gs'o^  gs-og;  a^-o^  as-ggj  s^o^ 
|IIJI|IlilgIIJl2lUI|Iill 

THE  PLACE  OF  Hoc  PRODUCTION  IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING 


175 


Ha 
aw-J 

co  co  co  co     *S  co  co  co     t-*oooooo     i^t^coo     i-H«-HrHO 

(-OOCN^ 

t^-»~oooo 

>        oS 
<J  0 

*» 

• 

"3 

O  ^  ^1*  CO       CO  CN  CN  Oi       l*»  O  CO  O       OOOOCNCO       h*^OOO 

t~C5CNCO 
O  00  CO  CO 

i 

B* 

life's 

Pi 

* 

•» 

1- 

old 
III 

898SS   S5S3R   *$$$   SS8S   S8SS 

co>oco>n 

« 

25o. 

CO-*")-*       •tfCOCOO       r~>OCDO       0500CNOO       00«0-«» 

^CJJ-*-* 

Q. 

I|S 

** 

w 

1 

!"§! 

gsgs  gsss  sg§s  gggg  ssss 

SCNOCN 
COCNCO 

te 

3^  ^ 

oocor~co     coming     cst^wcN     i-io-*o     ot^co-n 

CO  —<  CO  CO 

5- 

s=^ 

M 

•» 

Jlf 

S^OOCO       OOOJCNOO       -*00»--l       CN^HTfOO       CO  (N  t^  •* 
OCOO       t^OOCNO       COCOCOCN       t^^tOiO       lOkOOCN 

co  oo  oo  •* 

O  00  »^  •"< 

^^ 

c3 

CNCNCOCO       COCOCOCO       CNCNCNCN       CM  CN  CN  CO       1<  •*•*•* 

i.O 

CN 

0 

CN^-cOO 
•» 

i 

•a 

1. 
w  £ 

CS-*-*C»       t-KNiniO       ^IIOTJ<CO       IO;O-*00       COCMCNi-H 
i-<O—nO       UJiOCO-*       COOCOO       CO<NTl<00       i-ir-OCN 

o 

a 

2 

rH  »-t  O  O 

350-poun 

£ 

00  00  O  O       O  O  O  O)       t*»  r^  t-»  00       t"»  t^  00  Oi       CN  04  ^  CO 
¥t 

re-year  av 

C5O1OO 

•» 

J3 

•ST3 

S 

0  0 

S" 

ilif  II  j|   lljl   lljf  ||t| 

IS  1-5  1-5^ 

ll 

Oi  »O  CO  «-H       O  W  00  <N       Oi  O5  CO  W       ^H  ^  Co  "5      00  ^t  *-<  ^* 

SCOOOCN 
CNO5"5 

03 
> 

^  ~  ^^           ~~~~  ww 

jjCN-Hrt 

1 

Ja 

M 

$£$%    8S5SS   SSI3S   §?5??S   SSS* 

OOCOO55O 

200-pounc 

•cu 

PH 

Oi  O  GO  CO       OOOO       00  00  GO  t^*       t*  Is"  t*»  t^»       O  CO  M  W 

»»rt 

•» 

Tj2 

Year  an 
month  BC 

J?  :  :  :    &  :  :  :    b  :  :  :    t?  :  :  :    EJ  :  :  : 

a.g_:  ;    S^_:  ;    p-gj  :    p-gj  :    f-gj  : 

S            S            8            S            8 

l^li 

176  BULLETIN  No.  301  [December, 

gain  of  4  cents  a  bushel  would  have  been  made  on  the  additional  corn 
fed  to  the  hog.  Such  results  would  be  obtained,  of  course,  only  under 
good  conditions,  where  the  hogs  are  efficiently  handled  and  are  making 
excellent  gains. 

The  prices  given  in  the  table  are  Chicago  prices.  The  informa- 
tion may  be  adapted  to  farm  prices  by  reducing  the  difference  in  value 
between  light  and  heavy  hogs  by  the  cost  of  marketing  the  150  pounds 
additional  weight.  This  should  include  shipping  and  selling  charges. 
Also,  the  average  price  of  corn  shown  in  the  last  column  of  the  table 
should  be  reduced  by  the  cost  of  shelling  and  marketing  it. 

Table  14  shows  the  same  information  for  fall  pigs  excepting  that 
in  the  last  column  the  average  price  of  No.  3  corn  at  Chicago  is  used, 
as  it  is  assumed  that  after  April  No.  3  corn  will  be  available  from  the 
new  crop.  If  a  lower  grade  of  corn  were  to  be  used,  it  could  not  be 
expected  that  there  would  be  a  similar  reduction  in  the  cost  of  grow- 
ing the  hogs  out  to  heavier  weights,  as  more  than  10.7  bushels  of  corn 
would  probably  be  required  to  secure  the  150  pounds  gain. 

In  this  comparison  a  ration  of  corn  and  tankage  has  been  used 
since  it  is  regarded  as  a  standard  ration  for  hogs  of  the  weights  dis- 
cussed. A  farmer,  however,  may  choose  to  use  other  feeds  in  secur- 
ing the  added  weight.  But,  if  tankage  is  not  used,  some  good  protein 
supplement  will  be  needed  to  produce  efficient  gains,  and  it  is  probable 
that  the  cost  would  be  equal  to  the  cost  of  tankage  at  $70  a  ton.  If  a 
less-efficient  protein  supplement  were  to  be  used,  its  lower  cost  would 
probably  be  balanced  by  the  need  for  a  larger  amount  of  corn  or  other 
grain.  While  the  figures  here  given  do  not  have  universal  application, 
they  illustrate  facts  which  one  should  take  into  account  in  determining 
whether  or  not  to  feed  hogs  to  heavier  weights. 

In  the  above  illustrations  the  costs  other  than  feed  of  carrying 
hogs  from  a  200-pound  to  a  350-pound  weight  are  estimated  at  50 
cents  a  hog.  Under  some  conditions  these  costs  may  be  less.  Where 
corn  is  hogged  down,  little  labor  and  other  expense,  aside  from  feed, 
will  be  required  to  carry  hogs  to  the  heavier  weight.  Also,  with  this 
practice  the  greatest  saving  of  fertility  is  made,  as  previously  dis- 
cussed. However,  experimental  work  at  the  University  of  Illinois 
indicates  that  the  saving  in  labor  from  hogs  harvesting  their  own  corn 
is  partly  offset  by  lower  gains  from  corn  fed  in  this  way. 

Seasonal  Variations  in  Price 

The  average  September  price  of  hogs,  compared  with  that  at  other 
seasons  of  the  year  during  the  past  five  years,  has  not  been  so  favor- 
able as  the  average  price  of  the  past  twenty-five  years.  August  seems 
to  have  become  a  better  month  than  September  in  which  to  market 
hogs.  This  may  be  expected  to  continue  as  more  farmers  use  sanitary 
measures  in  hog  production  and  follow  other  improved  practices  that 


1927} 


THE  PLACE  OF  HOG  PRODUCTION  IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING 


177 


will  enable  them  to  put  spring  pigs  on  the  market  at  an  earlier  date 
and  spread  the  marketing  of  hogs  more  evenly  thru  the  year. 

While  data  are  not  now  available  to  show  the  relative  cost  of 
finishing  hogs  at  different  seasons  of  the  year,  it  is  true  that  the  earlier 
spring  pigs  are  finished  for  market  the  larger  is  the  proportion  of  old 
corn  required,  and  this  tends  to  increase  the  cost  of  production.  Of 
course  when  some  pigs  are  put  on  lighter  feed  than  others  farrowed 


FIG.  7.— THE  CORN-HOG  RATIO  FROM  1913  TO  1926  BASED 
ON  FARM  PRICES  FOR  ILLINOIS 

The  graph  shows  the  bushels  of  corn  required  each  month  to 
equal  the  price  of  100  pounds  of  hogs  at.  farm  prices.  The  relative 
prices  of  corn  and  hogs  may  serve  more  or  less  as  a  guide  in  the 
production  and  marketing  of  hogs. 


at  the  same  time,  they  will  take  a  longer  time  to  reach  given  weight 
and  will  have  to  be  charged  with  the  additional  carrying  cost  of  main- 
tenance during  the  longer  period. 

While  the  price  received  for  hogs  during  the  winter  months  may 
be  relatively  less  than  at  other  seasons,  more  of  the  gain  will  be 
secured  from  new  corn,  which  can  be  charged  to  the  hogs  at  a  lower 
price.  Also,  the  finishing  of  hogs  during  the  winter  months  does  not 
interfere  with  other  farm  work,  as  it  may  during  the  cropping  season. 


178  BULLETIN  No.  301  [December, 

Using  the  five-year  period  1921  to  1925  as  a  basis,  there  would 
seem  to  be  little  to  gain  by  carrying  hogs  weighing  200  pounds  in 
August  or  early  September  to  a  heavier  weight  for  November  mar- 
keting. If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  hogs  do  not  reach  a  weight  of  200 
pounds  before  October  or  November  while  making  normal  gains,  there 
would  seem  usually  to  be  a  definite  gain  from  feeding  to  heavier 
weights  for  marketing  the  following  January  or  February.  Of  course 
if  hog  prices  are  low  or  on  a  downward  trend  in  relation  to  the  price 
of  corn,  this  might  not  be  true. 

In  regard  to  fall  pigs,  the  experience  during  the  past  five  years 
indicates  an  advantage  in  general  in  feeding  out  to  heavier  weights, 
especially  when  the  pigs  can  be  carried  to  July  or  August.  The  mar- 
keting of  fall  pigs  is  usually  distributed  quite  evenly  over  several 
months  of  the  year.  Hence  there  is  no  one  month  which  is  outstand- 
ingly profitable  from  the  market  standpoint.  While  prices  of  hogs  are 
usually  relatively  high  in  March,  few  fall  pigs  reach  market  then,  and 
the  difference  in  the  price  of  light  hogs  in  March  and  heavy  hogs  three 
months  later  is  not  so  great  as  during  the  fall  and  winter  months. 
Also  the  hogs  marketed  at  this  time  are  all  fed  out  on  the  same  crop 
of  corn,  and  waiting  for  the  later  markets  in  order  to  use  new  corn  is 
not  a  factor. 

Consideration  of  Price  Trends 

In  deciding  whether  or  not  to  feed  hogs  to  heavier  weights,  the 
probable  trend  in  the  prices  of  corn  and  hogs  should  be  taken  into 
account.  Producers  too  frequently  base  their  decisions  regarding  pro- 
duction and  marketing  upon  current  market  conditions,  and  neglect 
to  take  into  account  information  which  might  help  them  to  foresee 
market  conditions  two  or  three  months  later.  When  the  price  trend  of 
hogs  is  definitely  upward  and  is  favorable  to  that  of  corn,  there  may 
be  a  marked  advantage  in  feeding  to  heavier  weights.  But  when  hog 
prices  have  been  for  some  time  at  a  high  level  in  relation  to  corn,  and 
an  increased  supply  of  hogs  or  a  short  supply  of  corn  is  in  sight,  a 
downward  trend  will  destroy  the  advantage  before  the  hogs  can  be 
fed  out  to  the  heavier  weight. 

Briefly  some  of  the  factors  which  should  be  taken  into  consider- 
ation in  planning  future  hog  production  are  the  facilities  on  the  farm 
for  handling  hogs,  the  number  of  hogs  on  farms,  as  reported  by  various 
public  agencies,  the  movement  of  hogs  to  market,  the  results  of  sur- 
veys of  the  intentions  to  breed,  weather  conditions,  the  prevalence  of 
disease,  the  supply  of  old  corn  in  the  country,  the  prospect  for  a  new 
corn  crop,  and  general  business  conditions. 

The  final  decision,  however,  whether  to  feed  hogs  out  to  light  or 
to  heavy  weights  comes  back  primarily  to  the  question  of  a  man's  own 
efficiency  in  producing  hogs  and  the  thrift  of  the  hogs  on  hand  at  the 
time  the  decision  is  made.  In  connection  with  the  first  point  the 


1037  \  THE  PLACE  OF  HOG  PRODUCTION  IN  CORN-BELT  FARMING  179 

attention  of  the  reader  may  well  be  called  again  to  Fig.  6,  page  167, 
and  Table  9,  page  168,  which  illustrate  the  wide  range  that  occurs 
among  different  farms  in  the  cost  of  producing  hogs.  It  is  evident 
that  the  reason  for  the  differences  in  the  results  which  men  secure  in 
conducting  the  same  farm  enterprise  lies  largely  in  the  ability  of  the 
manager. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS-URBAN* 


